As promised, House Republicans took on the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rules this week, voting to suspend funding for the agency's controversial plan.
By a vote of 244 to 181, the House approved an amendment to a spending bill that would halt funding for the plan, which was approved in December. Though the issue is generally split among party lines, 10 Democrats voted in favor of the amendment, and four Republicans voted against it.
The Internet "does not need to be regulated by an unelected group of federal bureaucrats," Rep. Cliff Stearns, a Florida Republican, said in a statement. "Net regulation will discourage investment and innovation precisely when we need it most, especially in light of our push to increase broadband deployment. The FCC should not stand in the way of Internet innovation and expansion."
Stearns, who joined with Rep. Greg Walden of Oregon to introduce the amendment, said any Internet regulations should be approved by Congress "only after holding deliberative hearings and with a vote by elected officials."
The vote comes several days after Walden and Rep. Fred Upton, a Michigan Republican, joined Sens. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas to author a joint resolution of disapproval regarding the FCC's net neutrality rules.
A joint resolution of disapproval, part of the Congressional Review Act, would need to pass with a majority in both chambers, then survive a veto from President Obama, so passage is unlikely. The Walden amendment also needs to survive additional votes.
In December, the FCC approved net neutrality rules along party lines. The order provides three high-level rules: transparency; no blocking; and no unreasonable discrimination. The order received support from Chairman Julius Genachowski and Democratic commissioners Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn, but was not approved by Republican commissioners Robert McDowell and Meredith A. Baker.
Republicans swiftly vowed to take the rules down. Democrats, however, said the rules did not go far enough; Sen. Maria Cantwell unveiled net neutrality legislation intended to strengthen the rules.
The main issue is whether the FCC has the authority to regulate broadband in the first place. In April, a court ruled that the FCC had no right to hand down a 2008 network management enforcement action against Comcast, throwing the FCC's broadband authority into question. The FCC later maintained that it has authority via the Communications Act, but others disagree. Verizon and MetroPCS sued the FCC, arguing that it lacks the authority to regulate broadband. In its response, the FCC said the suits should be dismissed because Verizon and MetroPCS filed their complaints too soon.
House Democrats, meanwhile, criticized the amendment and defended the FCC's right to regulate broadband.
"Contrary to the hyperventilated rhetoric from the Republicans yesterday, the new FCC open Internet rules are, in fact, a bill of rights for Internet users," Rep. Henry Waxman, ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, said in a statement. "They do not 'regulate the Internet,' they do not grant the government the power to 'turn off the Internet,' and they do not determine what content is appropriate for users to access. Their goal is just the opposite: to prevent Internet gatekeepers from deciding what content their subscribers can access."
Reps. Anna Eshoo, Edward Markey, and Mike Doyle echoed those sentiments.
"These rules spur competition, innovation, and job creation, and efforts to repeal them are a march to folly, Eshoo said.
Markey said the "the Open Internet Rule is a commonsense, light-touch approach that will ensure the certainty to spur investment, create jobs, encourage innovation, benefit consumers and keep our country in a leadership position in the global marketplace."
"The rules make three simple promises," Doyle said. "One, to consumers: that we can visit any website we want using any service we want on any device we want. Two, for innovators: that they can create tools without getting permission from the government or the company that the consumers use to get online. Three: that we put a cop on beat, to make sure that both sides are doing what they're supposed to and to be a neutral arbitrator. That's all they do."
Editor's Note: This story was updated Monday with comment from House Democrats.