Republicans Launch eContract 2001

News flash: Congress is paying attention to the Internet. Armey and crew spell out the GOP's vision of the Internet and find time to talk about broadband access.

by Jim Wagner ISP-Lists Managing Editor [June 22, 2001]

The GOP dusted off its trusty eContract 2000 and gave it the once-over, updating it for this year's version of the Republican vision for the Internet, dubbed EC3.

As the title implies, EC3 is the third in the party's eContract with High-Tech America series.

It's a series that started in 1999 and has gained steam with a legislative body that is ever-so-slowly grasping the significance of the Internet on mainstream America.

Congress is finally beginning to understand that the Internet isn't just a bunch of clammy-faced, pre-pubescent teens hanging out in chat rooms, hacking into e-commerce sites, and downloading porn. They're finding out it's our mothers, fathers, brothers, and sisters who are getting online and experiencing the World Wide Web (and the World Wide Wait) for the first time.

As such, EC3 is designed to protect and encourage Internet use to people across the spectrum.

House Majority Leader Rep. Dick Armey (R-TX) led the press conference Wednesday outlining EC3. As you would expect, top billing went to Internet security, online privacy and modernizing the education system bread-and-butter issues designed to appeal to the soccer moms.

But a lot of time was spent talking about the future of broadband access and the government's role in legislating the Internet. The GOP thinks it has a framework that will accomplish that goal, Republican-style.

Free the Internet
Republicans want to incorporate a seeming oxymoron into high-tech policy, calling for a hands-off Congress.

Armey used the French government as an example of what happens to the Internet when bureaucracy meets business: an out-of-date tool with all the excitement and pizzazz of an ATM machine.

"Government solutions can be a tempting alternative to a competitive marketplace, but as they say, 'if you lie down with dogs you may wake up with fleas,' " Armey said. "So far the industry has achieved its great success primarily because government has not been involved. And we know that the government is like an annoying neighbor who, once invited to the party, won't leave when it's over."

Which is the exact opposite of what some members in the House are doing today.

There isn't an ISP in the country doesn't know about the Tauzin-Dingell Broadband Bill, which would essentially throw the Telecommunications Act into the scrap heap. The co-authors of the bill are widely recognized as pro-Bell and many fear the bill's passage would free the incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) from competitive strictures for broadband deployment, effectively ending competition.

A cursory inspection of eContract 2001 seems to show Republican support of the Tauzin-Dingell Bill. After all, the document tallies all the policies you would expect from a party labeled pro-business:

• Removing barriers to telecommuting and expanding workplace flexibility.
• Allowing high-speed Internet access to flourish.
• Preventing frivolous lawsuits that stifle economic growth.
• Promoting tax cut policies that enourage capital formation, investment and economic growth.

Rich Diamond, a spokesperson for Armey, acknowledged the bill's unpopularity with members on Capital Hill on both sides of the aisle as well as Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (CLECs) and ISPs. He strived to distance himself and his boss from the Tauzin-Dingell Bill, saying EC3 is not the endorsement of any particular bill in the House right now.

"What the eContract says is that we as a party support freeing broadband access, but it's not a specific endorsement of that bill," Diamond said. "We support the goal of getting broadband out there, Tauzin-Dingell is one way to do it, but it might not be the best way to do it.

"It's unclear how this will all shake out," Diamond continued. "Armey is concerned that consumers end up the best deal. With that focus, that's how we're going to approach the final outcome of the broadband bill."

A bipartisan war on Tauzin
What's clear is the support of many Republicans in what has become a fight that has transcended party lines.

Last year, more than 200 members signed on as co-sponsors to the previous Tauzin-Dingell Broadband Bill, many who took their colleagues' word at face value that it was good for the industry.

This year, only two names were on the bill, which barely made it out of the co-sponsors' own committee.

Jonathan Askin, general counsel for the Association for Local Telecommunications Services, summed it up best. Officials at ALTS, a vocal opponent of the Broadband Bill, weren't sure what the Republican response to the bill would be earlier this year.

"Technology makes for strange bedfellows," Askin said. "You have Democrats and Republicans that would never agree on any other issue coming together to fight this bill."

—End