Despite yesterday's crushing blow to the Senate cybersecurity bill (S 3414), lawmakers who did not reach a deal before the August recess are vowing to keep working toward a compromise in the hope of passing something this year. They have two factors working against them: limited time on the legislative calendar, and the wide gulf that remains among lawmakers on how to protect the nation's digital infrastructure.
Democrats blamed the failure to invoke cloture on Republicans bowing to the influence of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which opposed the measure and afterwards called it a "crummy deal." Republicans responded that Democrats should have brought up the bill earlier this session and allowed amendments to ensure a full debate on the measure. Those partisan disputes, coupled with substantive disagreements about the scope of the actual legislation, make reaching an agreement this year difficult.
The House, for its part, is urging the Senate to take up the four cybersecurity bills that it passed in spring. Those measures take a more piecemeal approach to the issue, but they also include an information-sharing measure (HR 3523) likely to face opposition by privacy advocates such as Democratic Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester of Montana and Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley of Oregon.
But there is cause for optimism, at least for pro-industry interests, according to Stifel Nicolaus analysts who say the extra time will will allow senators to work on amendments to the bill that can win over Republicans and private sector skeptics who found the bill sponsored by Joseph I. Lieberman, I-Conn., to be too overreaching on issues such as critical infrastructure.
Quotable: "This bill will be back because it must be back. The vote today is not the end of the discussion, but rather the beginning of the discussion." — Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., following Thursday's cloture vote. House votes unanimously on Internet regulation: In a rare display of bipartisanship, the House voted 414-0 for a resolution (H Con Res 127) stating Congress' preference that the Internet continue to be regulated under a multi-stakeholder process that includes private and public sector players. Rep. Mary Bono Mack, R-Calif., introduced the measure after concerns emerged that restrictive nations such as Russia, China and India might use the International Telecommunications Union, a branch of the United Nations, to try to exert control over the Internet. In a statement, Mack said, "Today’s unanimous vote sends a clear and unmistakable message: The American people want to keep the Internet free from government control."The Senate may take up a similar resolution ahead of the World Conference on International Telecommunications in Dubai later this year, where lawmakers expect Internet control provisions to come up. Still, it's unclear how much of a threat such proposals even pose, and Thursday's vote may have been largely symbolic.
Ambassador Terry Kramer is expected to submit his first round of proposals for the Dubai conference soon, and Federal Communications Commissioner Ajit Pai, the newest Republican addition to the agency, praised the House for taking the vote ahead of Kramer's submission. Pai said the resolution is "the latest evidence that all American policy makers stand together on a bipartisan basis to oppose international regulation of the Internet."
AT&T announces bid for NextWave spectrum: AT&T plans to spend more than $600 million in cash to buy NextWave Wireless and that company's spectrum licenses in a deal that would help the former expand its network. The deal is subject to review by the Federal Communications Commission and could face an antitrust investigation by the Justice Department, but government approval appears likely, according to Stifel Nicolaus analysts.AT&T has also shown interest in other spectrum holdings, and this latest deal caused consumer interest group Public Knowledge to raise a red flag. John Bergmayer, a senior staff attorney with the nonprofit, warned, "The 'spectrum gap' between AT&T and Verizon and the rest of the industry is already unacceptably large. These proposed transactions would worsen it. They are a symptom of our broken spectrum policy, which rewards concentration rather than competition."