Recently in Congress Category

This has been old news for a while, but Congress is finally starting to ask questions, as CNN Money reports:

In a letter sent to the companies Tuesday, Dingell noted that the five-member FCC could be forced to operate with just four commissioners - two Republicans and two Democrats - as early as November, and they could split votes on controversial decisions.

Currently, the commission consists of three Republicans and two Democrats, but Republican Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate's term ends when Congress ends its current session. A new commissioner likely won't be appointed until after a new administration and Congress begins next year.

I've written about this before, and the folks at Communications Daily were on it over a month ago. But many FCC-watchers are neglecting to mention the fact that Tate was supposed to have been gone last week, the 26th having been the date that the House was to adjourn sine die (ending the 110th Congress). The Senate, on the other hand, will be holding pro forma sessions to prevent President Bush from replacing Tate with a recess appointment.

Another thing -- if Sen. Obama wins the election, there is a good possibility that Chairman Martin (K-Mart) may resign, leaving room for Obama to elevate either Michael Copps or Jonathan Adelstein to the Chairmanship, or bring in his own man in addition to replacing Tate's GOP-held seat (the FCC cannot have more than 3 of the same party).

But this may not happen until March, so the FCC will be operating 2-2. And currently, forbearance petitions (requests for the FCC to waive rules) are deemed granted if the Commission doesn't act, or there is a tie vote (say the Telcos). Dingell wants to know why a regulation should be automatically waived in the case of a tie (or no vote), as opposed to requiring an affirmative vote before granting forbearance.

Good question. .

Good question.

So around the middle of July there was a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on laptops being searched at the border by Customs. Witnesses had concerns over the scope of searches, sometimes with the laptops not being returned. The Chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., was not pleased.

But there is now a bill pending that would require some accountability from DHS...introduced on the House side by Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-California. H.R. 6869 would require reports to Congress by DHS and impose some limits on the searches. But the Courts have already ruled that laptop searches are constitutional, so what's the point? Ars Technica sums it up:

Sanchez's bill would bring more routine to the search process. The bill requires the government to draft additional rules regarding information security, the number of days a device can be retained, receipts that must be issued when devices are taken, ways to report abuses, and it requires the completion of both a privacy impact study and a civil liberties impact study. Travelers would also have the explicit right to watch as the search is conducted.

It's September. The House adjourns at the end of the month unless they recess "subject to the call of the chair," effectively ending the 110th Congress and letting the campaign season go nuts. The Senate will probably hold pro forma sessions, as has become the practice, with a local, either Ben Cardin, D-Md., or Jim Webb, D-Va., gaveling the Senate to order before recessing, only to avoid recess appointments by President Bush.

So what's the point? Over 40 groups wanted this bill months ago. Why nothing?

When  Robert and I interviewed Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, I knew that people in Congress were starting to understand how to communicate. Now? I'm not so sure. Aaron Brazell has a good thread going on on a plan to restrict Congressional media postings. I've written on it in WID, so I can't comment, but please look at Aaron's thread, and his original post.

Ok, so yesterday I posted the witness list for today's Net Neutrality/Broadband hearing. I could have woken up at 5am to beat the line standers and get a seat with the lobbyists who pay people to stand in line for them in the halls of the Rayburn building, but I didn't. I could be listening on the Audio Webcast. I tuned in for about 10 minutes, and haven't been impressed yet. I've got other projects, other things to work on, so I'm listening but my attention has not been caught. Why? Have you ever turned on your favorite TV show expecting a new episode and instead getting a rerun, or worse yet, a 3 hour extended version of American Idol? You know what you'll be seeing and hearing. No surprises, nothing to discuss with your friends. Just the same, this hearing, despite a few new faces, was a rerun in a series over the past year or so, including a few at the FCC. 

Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) and his Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet will be holding a hearing tomorrow on H.R. 5353, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008. The bill would direct the FCC to figure out exactly how many households get real Broadband service, as well as establish very basic Net Neutrality protections.

Steve Peterman, Executive Producer, Hannah Montana (against)
Mitch Bainwol, CEO, RIAA (against)
Kyle McSlarrow, CEO, NCTA (against)
Ben Scott, Director, Free Press (for)
Walter McCormick, CEO, USTA (against)
Christopher Yoo, CDT (against, academically)
Michelle Coombs, Christian Coalition (for)
Scott Savitz, Shoebuy.com (for)

As if FCC Chairman Kevin Martin troubles weren't enough as is, yesterday they Chairmen of both the full Energy and Commerce Committee and the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet sent a letter inquiring as to the status of the XM-Sirius merger.

Read it and weep.

How about those June hearings?

I'll leave the good stuff to Ars Technica, but Howard Berman's bouncing baby copyright bill is one step closer to becoming law, sailing through the Judiciary Committee.

The bill would create a new position for a federal copyright enforcement czar, establish a new copyright enforcement division within the Department of Justice, and would also permit law enforcement agents to seize property from perpetrators of copyright infringement. 

While I won't make any jokes about Cher or trees, or skiing, I will give a hat tip to That Other Andrew(tm) for pointing out the reintroduction of bills governing "Orphan Works" under copyright law.

John Kerry made a good point at yesterday's Senate Commerce Committee hearing (which I live-blogged). He noted that the last major revision to communications law in 1996 was mostly written to deal with telephone competition, and while he said that by now saying the Internet is the "future" has reached cliche level (it's the present, actually) that our last attempt to make policy was obsolete upon signing, dead on arrival.

Let me repeat that. John Kerry understands we're 12th in the ITU's "digital opportunity index." This is "Mr. Out-of-Touch" John Kerry, and even he understands what we have no broadband policy at all (which really is the official policy, to have no policy and let the "market" deal with it). Policy is no policy, sounds like J. Alfred Prufrock does Broadband, doesn't it?

For the more fun part of the hearing, I'll defer to Tech Liberation Front and their notes on celebrity testimony. Why was Justine Bateman a witness? I sort of fell asleep during that part of her testimony. Not really, but I wasn't quite alert to live-blog it as much as I cared about say, the FCC Chairman or Larry Lessig.

Another flashback and money quote from TLF on celebrity testimony:

So there's another Net neutrality hearing today. I'm beginning to think we'll have to endure one every week for the rest of time. Anyway, today's took place in the Senate Commerce Committee and it featured the testimony of 1980s TV star Justine Bateman, who was in the sitcom "Family Ties."....

...my favorite celebrity testimony of all-time had to be from 1993, when Sheri Lewis and her sock puppet "Lamb Chop" testified in favor of the Children's Television Act, a law regulating educational TV programming. What made is so special was not that Ms. Lewis testified alone. Lamb Chop testified too! I wish I had the video of that to post here. I mean, there was a woman with a hand in a sock making it talk to elected members of Congress... and they were listening. Awesome.

I am going to find that video. Apparently, Kermit the Frog has also appeared before Congress. I will find proof. This I swear.

The Senate Commerce Committee will hold a star-studded hearing tomorrow on "The Future of the Internet." Witnesses include:

Opening Remarks

Witnesses

Opening Remarks

Panel 1

The Honorable Kevin J. Martin Chairman Federal Communications Commission

Panel 2

Ms. Michele Combs Vice President of Communications Christian Coalition of America

Dr. Robert Hahn Executive Director, Center for Regulatory and Market Studies American Enterprise Institute

Mr. Patric Verrone President Writers Guild of America, West

Ms. Justine Bateman Actress / Writer / Producer

Mr. Kyle McSlarrow President and CEO National Cable & Telecommunications Association

Professor Lawrence Lessig Stanford Law School

That's right, peeps! K-Mart is testifying! K-Mart! and Lessig! and McSlarrow! Oh, My!

I'm getting in line early, that's for sure. Those line standers ain't got nothin on me. Bring it.

If I can get into the room, we'll see some fun live bloggin'