Small Business Broadband Deployment Act

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the new subcommittee chairman of the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology. I know our country is in good hands and our committee is as well with Mrs. Blackburn chairing that important subcommittee. I want to thank my colleague from California for his kind comments and his work over the years on these issues. I concur with him that we have a wonderful opportunity to continue our bipartisan work as the committee has been known for, for a long time. Clearly, from time to time, we will have our differences, and we know that as well. It is part of democracy. There is so much of this work, like this bill, that is so very important.

As we begin the 115th Congress, I am pleased to be here to support this bipartisan bill because I think it reflects the best of what government can do for those who sent us here. Small Business Broadband Deployment Act seeks to alleviate, as you have heard, Mr. Speaker, these unnecessary regulatory burdens on small Internet service providers--these are the small ones, oftentimes in our rural communities but not always--while still ensuring that consumers are protected. We found the right balance here.

By extending an exemption to the Federal Communications Commission's enhanced reporting rules, this bill allows these small businesses to focus on their core mission, and that is to provide broadband Internet access to customers throughout America. Over the past year, we spent a great deal of time focused on this issue. We first raised concerns with the Federal Communications Commission in a letter, Mr. Speaker, from the committee, as well as from the Committee on Small Business. We urged the chairman, Tom Wheeler, to not only make the exemption permanent but also to raise the threshold by defining a small business to bring it in line with the definitions previously blessed by the Obama administration's Small Business Administration. We were trying to find some consistency, some workability, and some common sense here.

Well, unfortunately, the FCC only extended the exemption for 1 year, despite the overwhelming support to do this permanent extension. It was clear Congress needed to act. That is what we are doing here. I introduced a discussion draft last year that would have permanently extended the exemption and increased the threshold by defining a small business.

At our January 2016 legislative hearing on the bill, we heard from a small Internet service provider who shared the dilemma that many small ISPs face in these circumstances: Should they put up new equipment, or should they hire a lawyer to help with compliance? Should they improve service for customers, or should they devote those financial resources to sifting through regulatory language and drafting extensive reports on packet loss?

So often these small ISPs provide service to areas of the country that are rural, like in my district throughout eastern Oregon or Representative Loebsack's district in Iowa--we heard from him--or may not be as easy to serve and, in some cases, provide a vital competitive edge to larger Internet service providers. We should be making all efforts to promote the viability of these businesses, not saddle them with additional requirements that make it more difficult to do what they are in business to do.

Representative Loebsack and I were able to come to a compromise through extensive negotiation. In the bill we have before us today, we extend this exemption for 5 years. Now, it gives greater regulatory certainty to these small Internet service providers looking for predictability when making investment decisions. In addition, we increased the threshold for defining a small business and required the FCC to report back to Congress on the exemption along with data around small ISPs that is currently lacking.

In the end, this bill presents a good compromise that will relieve burdens for small businesses while leaving in place protections for consumers. So it is important to note this bill doesn't affect the transparency rules, as my colleagues have mentioned, adopted in the FCC's 2010 rules. Consumers will continue to have access to those disclosures they have come to expect, with the information needed to make informed decisions about their Internet service.

Again, this bill passed the House unanimously last year, 411-0. Unfortunately, while it made it through the Senate Commerce Committee, it never quite came up for a vote in the Senate. In addition, the exemption granted by the FCC expired on December 15, 2016, and has not yet been renewed. Now, that leaves these many small businesses exposed to the serious reporting burden that we have heard about throughout this process, as well as a great deal of uncertainty around what the future may hold for them. It is now more important than ever that we act to quickly fill this gap and protect these businesses and the consumers they serve.

I would like to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, especially Representative Loebsack, for working with us on this bill. This bipartisan process has resulted in a strong piece of legislation that I am confident will protect many and promote continued network investment and build-out by small businesses. This legislation represents a commonsense approach to a problem that directly impacts so many of our constituents. This solution will enable our country to continue its leadership in broadband deployment. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 288) to ensure that small business providers of broadband Internet access service can devote resources to broadband deployment rather than compliance with cumbersome regulatory requirements.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials in the Record on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 288, the Small Business Broadband Deployment Act. I am glad that the House is taking swift action on this bill, which would protect small Internet service providers from the enhanced disclosure requirements laid out in the 2015 Open Internet Order.

After adopting the Open Internet Order, the FCC recognized the importance of exempting small ISPs from these enhanced transparency rules and subsequently granted a temporary exemption to broadband providers with fewer than 100,000 subscribers. However, the Commission failed to reach an agreement to grant another exemption before the deadline last December and, as a result, has left hundreds of our Nation's small providers vulnerable to cumbersome rules.

FCC Commissioners Pai and O'Rielly have taken action, since the exemption expired, to reassure our small broadband providers that the rules will not be enforced until the situation has been addressed by the Commission, but Congress should go a step further and provide certainty to our Nation's small businesses and pass this bill.

Rather than a 1-year exemption to the enhanced disclosure requirements, this bill would exempt for 5 years broadband providers with fewer than 250,000 subscribers from the enhanced reporting obligations, providing them with the regulatory certainty to invest in their business.

At our hearing last January, we heard from multiple witnesses just how cumbersome and burdensome these rules are. One witness described the difference to be as significant as the need to hire regulatory counsel versus the ability to build another tower to provide service. For a small business in a capital-intensive industry, that could be the difference between getting more people connected to the Internet and going out of business.

We cannot let our small businesses and hardworking taxpayers be saddled

with more onerous rules and the costs that they bring. In addition to regulatory relief for small ISPs, the bill adds certainty for our Nation's small ISPs by extending the exemption for 5 years.

It was disappointing to see the Commission fail to reach an agreement at the end of last year to extend the exemption, and it is why we are here today. Despite overwhelming bipartisan support from Congress and President Obama's Small Business Administration, negotiations fell short, and our Nation's smallest and most competitive Internet service providers were left to bear the burden.

In today's 21st century economy, we need to do more to encourage connectivity, and this bill embodies that spirit. Congress is poised to provide the regulatory certainty small businesses are seeking in order to invest in stronger networks and foster a better consumer experience.

I want to thank Chairman Walden and Mr. Loebsack for acting quickly to reintroduce this legislation, and I urge all of my colleagues to support the commonsense measure.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the author of this legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter), a new member of our committee, the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).

Mr. Speaker, I will just encourage my colleagues to join us in passing H.R. 288.

As my colleague from California said, this is one of those commonsense measures. When you talk about removing the burden of regulatory overreach from our Nation's small business, and in this case, our small Internet service providers, this is something that will help get that job done. It is also something that will help extend Internet service to more Americans, and that is a goal that we all share.

So at this time, in closing, I encourage passage of H.R. 288.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my chairman, Mr. McClintock, and the ranking member for her work on this legislation. Much has been explained about it. This is a good piece of legislation.

I am not going to take a great deal of time, but it shows that we can work together. The stakeholders got involved 4 years ago. We wanted to make this permanent. We worked it all out last year and we passed it, and it got bogged down on the other side.

It is a chance where we can show and take programs and put them together with tribes and have a better efficiency for the dollar we spend. If we do more of that in this Congress, we will have a lot better Congress and a better nation.

This is a small minority group that has done well under these programs, and it is not a new law. In 1992, I was here when we passed it. We would like to see to fruition the work put together by Mr. Goodlatte, Mr. Bishop, Mr. Brady, and Chairwoman Foxx. They all worked together with their staffs to put this, I think, excellent piece of legislation together to put to the voters on this floor, and I urge the passage of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, my bill--the Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services Consolidation Act--enables tribes and tribal organizations to offer highly effective workforce development initiatives that uplift Native communities around the country. We passed this bipartisan legislation in the House by a voice vote at the end of last Congress, and the Senate simply ran out of time to secure final passage.

H.R. 228 makes the Tribal ``477 Program'' permanent and improves its administration. The 477 Program allows tribes to combine employment, childcare, and job training funding from a variety of federal sources and conduct consolidated, comprehensive reporting. Participants have leveraged these advantages to develop and run innovative programs that have had a meaningful impact on thousands of Alaska Native and American Indian families. In addition, the efficiencies of the 477 Program save both tribes and the federal government money, time, and resources.

Congress established the 477 Program in 1992 as a demonstration program. The Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes in Southeast Alaska was actually the first in the nation to begin operating a 477 program and to this day continues to benefit from offering services through 477.

The 477 Program has a proven track record of success and allows for bold approaches to address significant education and training needs that exist in Indian country. This program is what tribal self- determination is all about. Tribes understand their members best and know how to use these tools for creating and expanding employment opportunities in their communities.

My bill improves accounting procedures and reporting mechanisms to uphold the original intent of the program, ensure that agencies treat tribes fairly, and set a foundation for participants' continued success.

I would like to thank the members of the 477 Tribal Work Group who, over the last 4 years, have been stalwart advocates for this legislation and did not give up at the end of last Congress.

I would also like to thank Chairman Bishop, Ranking Member Grijalva, and their staffs for making this bill possible and working to move it to the floor quickly this year. Finally, I offer my thanks to Chairman Brady, Chairwoman Foxx, Chairman Goodlatte, and their staffs for their assistance with the legislation.

I urge adoption of H.R. 228 today and encourage the Senate to take up this bill as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 228) to amend the Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 to facilitate the ability of Indian tribes to integrate the employment, training, and related services from diverse Federal sources, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 228, the Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Consolidation Act, is sponsored by my colleague from Alaska, Congressman Don Young. This bipartisan legislation would make the Tribal 477 Program permanent and make improvements to its administration.

The 477 Program was established by Congress in 1992 as a demonstration program. It allows tribes to combine employment, childcare, and job training funding from a variety of Federal sources and conduct consolidated, comprehensive reporting. The 477 Program embodies tribal self-determination by allowing tribes to provide opportunities tailored to the unique needs of their communities.

The bill improves accounting procedures and reporting mechanisms to uphold the original intent of the program, ensures that agencies treat tribes fairly, and sets a foundation for participants' continued success.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Kevin Brady of the Ways and Means Committee and Chairwoman Virginia Foxx of the Education and the Workforce Committee for agreeing to help expedite consideration of this bill.

I urge adoption of H.R. 228.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Committee on Ways and Means,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, February 22, 2017.

Hon. Rob Bishop,

Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Bishop: I write concerning H.R. 228, the

``Indian Employment, Training and Related Services

Consolidation Act of 2017,'' which was referred to the

Committee on Natural Resources.

As a result of your having consulted with us on provisions

in H.R. 228 that fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the

Committee on Ways and Means, I agree not to request a

sequential referral on this bill so that it may proceed

expeditiously to the House floor. The Committee on Ways and

Means takes this action with our mutual understanding that by

foregoing formal consideration of H.R. 228, we do not waive

any jurisdiction over subject matter contained in this or

similar legislation, and that our Committee will be

appropriately consulted and involved as this bill or similar

legislation moves forward. Our Committee also reserves the

right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of

conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or

similar legislation, and asks that you support any such

request.

I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming

this understanding, and would request that you include a copy

of this letter and your response in the Congressional Record

during the floor consideration of this bill. Thank you in

advance for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

Kevin Brady,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the legendary gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the sponsor of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

First of all, I want to congratulate the gentleman from Oregon on his new chairmanship. I look forward to working across the aisle on most of the issues. It is a good bipartisan subcommittee. I think we have a lot to accomplish.

The Small Business Broadband Deployment Act, H.R. 288, unanimously passed the House last Congress on a bipartisan vote, unanimous. H.R. 288 provides a 5-year exemption from the FCC's enhanced transparency rules for small Internet service providers that serve 250,000 or fewer subscribers.

This exemption comes with the understanding that there is a 5-year sunset on the exemption and that the FCC report to Congress with sufficient information to help us better understand the impacts on the consumers of a permanent exemption, of a possible permanent exemption. This data will also better inform us whether a longer term exemption is necessary and whether we got the definition of what a small business is right in this case.

It is also worth noting that H.R. 288 would leave intact the FCC's 2010 transparency rules that consumers have come to rely on, such as what they are paying for, Internet speeds they rely on, data quality, and so on. At the same time, these modifications provide certainty for small ISPs while the FCC collects and reports relevant information to Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank the chairman for his work on this and for his willingness to

compromise. As he pointed out, it was a process. It took both sides. I think he wanted permanent exemption, we wanted a less exemption, and it worked out. I think it is the right compromise. Five years gives businesses the predictability they need. It is a good place to be. In 5 years, we will see the report and whether it makes sense to continue the exemption or not.

I also want to take this opportunity to congratulate my colleague from Tennessee on assuming the chairmanship of the subcommittee. I look forward to our working together.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I just want to say that the bill passed unanimously in the last Congress. It is bipartisan. It gives small ISP providers a certain amount of time and it allows the FCC to decide if it is overburdensome or not, to require them to disclose information to their customers. This allows us to give customers the amount of protection that is due them as well.

So it is a good compromise. I urge all of my colleagues to support it.

I thank my colleagues for their hard work.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.