The FCC will be voting on Thursday on a net neutrality rule which preempts local authority over wireless facilities. The FCC wants to make broadband a Title II telecom service, meaning that the FCC would have preemption not just for phone service but for wireless broadband, as well. Here is the proposed rule.
Democrats are supporting the FCC’s net neutrality proposed rule which contains the very preemption of local authority over the approval and placement of wireless facilities which
Democrats opposed in HR 3557 in the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Republicans are generally opposing the proposed rule although for different reasons. It is not clear how much widespread awareness there has been among Democrats about the local zoning preemption in the rulemaking.
Today, please reach out (by email and follow-up calls) to your Democrat U.S. Senators and Representatives with the following template:
Dear Rep/Senator ________,
The FCC will be voting on Thursday on a net neutrality rule which preempts local authority over wireless facilities. My fellow residents and I oppose only the preemption portion of this proposed rule and respectfully request that it be deleted from the proposed rule, or to delay the FCC vote, if necessary, in order to effectuate this
deletion. Please contact:
- FCC
- Senate Commerce Committee
- House Energy & Commerce Committee
The FCC wants to make broadband a Title II telecom service, meaning that the FCC would have preemption not just for phone service but also for wireless broadband, overriding local ordinances, and cooperative federalism.
Here is the proposed rule.
The ask: no need to reclassify broadband as Title II as the FCC already has control of broadband under Title III (blocking, throttling, etc); but if they do
reclassify broadband as Title II, there should be a provision that the FCC will forebear from preemption under 47 USC §224, §253a-d, and §332c7B.
Democrats are supporting the proposed rule which contains the very preemption of local authority over the approval and placement of wireless facilities which Democrats opposed in HR 3557 in the
House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Rep. Pallone, Ranking Member of the House E&C in his remarks on HR 3557 opposed the preemption of local control
starting at line 6826. Rep. Nadler also stated his opposition to HR 3557 for the same reasons.
A number of
municipal groups filed comments in the FCC’s docket, opposing the massive expansion of preemption of local authority over wireless facilities:
- NATOA filed comments opposing local preemption over wireless facilities, and urging the FCC to avoid expanded preemption, writing "NATOA urges the Commission to forbear the application of
Sections 253 and 332(c)"
- National League of Cities filed comments opposing local preemption and urging forbearance.
- BB&K filed comments in the docket on behalf of a local
governments coalition (including Anne Arundel County and Montgomery County Maryland, among others), opposing local preemption
- Wired Broadband et al filed comments and reply comments, also urging the same
forbearance (they are attached)
The FCC has declined to make the proposed changes. The FCC readily acknowledged and defended expanding wireless preemption in its draft rule.
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter.
Respectfully submitted,
[Your Name] __________________
