On the recordApril 9, 2019
I agree with the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Porter), my colleague, that FCC enforcement is important in any area that the agency regulates, and that is why we will not oppose this amendment. That is also why we in the majority have asked, at several hearings, when we were going to have our first FCC oversight hearing this Congress. We are 4 months into this Congress, and the majority has yet to bring the FCC before the committee to answer questions relating to its past enforcement efforts on ISPs, the impact of this legislation, and other topics pending at the FCC. This is an issue that could have gained by having the FCC before the committee rather than the topic being delegated to a report that does not pertain to the base bill. This is also an issue that could have gained from bipartisan negotiations. All three Republican net neutrality bills would have the FCC oversee ISP practices and enforce net neutrality to keep a free and open internet. There is more agreement here than the majority would have you believe. There is also a role for the FCC to have in overseeing net neutrality and maintaining a free and open internet, and there should be clear net neutrality rules on the book. Where we disagree is on giving the FCC unchecked powers to regulate the internet and determine on its own what is just and reasonable. That is not net neutrality. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
