Taking a swipe at federal regulators, the state Senate voted Monday to impose rules on Internet service providers in a bid to guarantee that Californians have fair and reasonable access to the Internet.
Lawmakers voted 21-12 to send SB 460 to the Assembly, making it illegal for broadband companies to block or impair a customer’s access to the Internet, engage in deceptive consumer practices or impede competition.
“In today’s world, open access to the Internet is critical to free expression, free speech, as well as democracy,” bill author Sen. Kevin de Leon said on the Senate floor. “Americans of every income level, of every political persuasion depend on the Internet.”
The measure by de Leon, the Democratic president pro tem of the Senate, would also ban any state agency from contracting with an ISP unless is certifies, under penalty of perjury, that it won’t engage in a list of unlawful activities.
The bill is a response to so-called net neutrality rules overturned last month by the Federal Communications Commission, which banned Internet providers from blocking or slowing down websites.
It was a move that de Leon said contradicted the will of the majority of Americans and gave ISPs unfettered power to sabotage the competition and impede content by blocking or slowing down websites.
“I think we can all agree that no company should get to decide how you use the Internet,” de Leon said. “No company should have the power to slow down your connection. No company should be able to hold your ideas hostage or demand a ransom to access your favorite streaming service or website.”
Supporters of the proposed rules described them as critical for businesses, from big-box retailers to mom-and-pop stores and startup innovators. Critics warned that California-only rules could stifle investment in broadband development and delay the deployment of a 5G network in the country’s most populous state.
Assemblyman Jeff Stone, R-Temecula, echoed the sentiments of many telecommunications and broadband companies, which have said existing federal regulations will provide for continued open Internet use.
“This bill is nothing more than a political vehicle to sensationalize a presidential order, that will do nothing but confuse consumers, potentially increasing the cost of Internet subscription and stifle investment in broadband delivery, which is something that we need more of,” Stone said.
More than 50 organizations, including AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint, Frontier Communications, TechNet, the California Chamber of Commerce and other groups, oppose the bill. Just five organizations are listed in support, according to a Senate floor analysis of the bill.
Lawmakers agreed that the federal government ought to oversee Internet rules. But that’s where the consensus ended. Assemblyman Richard Roth, D-Riverside, for example, cautioned that de Leon’s bill would create a series of lawsuits in the state’s already-overcrowded and underfunded courts. Supporters argued that the federal government has abdicated its responsibility.
“The solution is for the federal government to step up and reverse the repeal of net neutrality, to adopt net neutrality as a uniform standard,” said Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, who also has legislation for a California approach. “Until that happens, we must act.”
