FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN The Honorable John Boehner Speaker U.S . House of Representatives H-232 the Capitol Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Speaker Boehner: June 17, 2014 Thank you for contacting me with your views regarding the Commission's efforts to reinstate rules to preserve and protect the Open Internet. As you know, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ("Notice") adopted by the Commission in May 2014 proposes rules that would replace those struck down early this year by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in its Verizon decision, and we ask a number of questions about the appropriate legal foundation for such rules. Your letter touches on some ofthe most important issues presented in the Notice, and it will be included in the record ofthe proceeding and considered as part ofthe Commission' s review. The Commission has been working for more than a decade to safeguard the Open Internet. While there has been a bipartisan consensus, starting under the Bush Administration with Chairman Powell, on the importance of an open Internet to economic growth, investment, and innovation, we find ourselves today without any rules in place to protect and promote Internet openness. The status quo is unacceptable. Unless and until the FCC adopts new rules, broadband providers will be free to block, degrade, or otherwise disadvantage innovative services on the Internet without threat of sanction by the FCC. This is unhealthy for investment, damaging to innovation, and, ultimately, bad for the future of the Internet. As Chairman, I will utilize the best tools available to me to ensure the Commission adopts effective and resilient open Internet rules . The court's decision in Verizon established unequivocally that the Commission has the legal authority under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to craft enforceable rules to protect and promote an open Internet for all Americans. In particular, the court agreed with the Commission' s conclusion that an open Internet enables a virtuous cycle of investment and broadband deployment- i.e. , that innovative content and services at the edges of the network drive consumer demand for broadband services, which drives investment in broadband infrastructure and deployment, which drives more innovation at the network' s edges, and so on. The court affirmed that it is the Commission's responsibility to protect this virtuous cycle and that Section 706 authorizes us to do so. I believe that the Section 706 framework set forth by the court provides us with the tools we need to adopt and implement robust and enforceable Open Internet rules. For this reason, the Page 2-The Honorable John Boehner Notice used the court's legal blueprint as a starting point. Nevertheless, the Commission also is seriously considering the use of Title II of the Communications Act as the basis for legal authority. The Notice explains that both Section 706 and Title II are viable solutions to the authority issue, and seeks comment on the benefits of each approach, as well as the benefits of one approach over the other, to ensuring that the Internet remains an open platform for innovation and expression. With respect to your concerns about Title II reclassification creating regulatory and economic uncertainty, the Notice asks about the extent to which forbearance from certain provisions of the Act or our rules would be justified so that the regulatory treatment of broadband providers is appropriately balanced. This Notice is the first step in the process, and I look forward to comments from all interested stakeholders, including members of the general public, as we develop a fulsome record on the legal authority and many other questions raised in the Notice . To that end, in an effort to maximize public participation in this proceeding, we have established an Open Internet email address- openinternet@fcc.gov- to ensure that Americans who may not otherwise have the opportunity to participate in an FCC proceeding can make their voices heard. In addition, to ensure sufficient opportunity for broad public comment, we have provided a lengthy comment and reply period that will give everyone an opportunity to participate. Again, I appreciate your deep interest in this matter and look forward to a continued engagement with you and others in Congress as we move forward with his proceeding. Tom Wheeler FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 17, 2014 The Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers U.S. House of Representatives 203 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Representative McMorris Rodgers: Thank you for contacting me with your views regarding the Commission's efforts to reinstate rules to preserve and protect the Open Internet. As you know, the Notice of Proposed Rule making ("Notice") adopted by the Commission in May 2014 proposes rules that would replace those struck down early this year by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in its Verizon decision, and we ask a number of questions about the appropriate legal foundation for such rules. Your letter touches on some of the most impmiant issues presented in the Notice , and it will be included in the record of the proceeding and considered as part of the Commission's rev1ew. The Commission has been working for more than a decade to safeguard the Open Internet. While there has been a bipartisan consensus, starting under the Bush Administration with Chairman Powell, on the importance of an open Internet to economic growth, investment, and innovation, we find ourselves today without any rules in place to protect and promote Internet ope1mess. The status quo is unacceptable. Unless and until the FCC adopts new rules, broadband providers will be free to block, degrade, or otherwise disadvantage innovative services on the Internet without threat of sanction by the FCC. This is unhealthy for investment, damaging to innovation, and, ultimately, bad for the future of the Internet. As Chairman, I will utilize the best tools available to me to ensure the Commission adopts effective and resilient open Internet rules . The court ' s decision in Verizon established unequivocally that the Commission has the legal authority under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to craft enforceable rules to protect and promote an open Internet for all Americans. In particular, the court agreed with the Commission' s conclusion that an open Internet enables a virtuous cycle of investment and broadband deployment- i.e. , that innovative content and services at the edges of the network drive consumer demand for broadband services, which drives investment in broadband infrastructure and deployment, which drives more innovation at the network's edges, and so on. The court affirmed that it is the Commission ' s responsibility to protect this virtuous cycle and that Section 706 authorizes us to do so. I believe that the Section 706 framework set forth by the court provides us with the tools we need to adopt and implement robust and enforceable Open Internet rules. For this reason, the Page 2-The Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers Notice used the court's legal blueprint as a starting point. Nevertheless, the Commission also is seriously considering the use of Title II of the Communications Act as the basis for legal authority. The Notice explains that both Section 706 and Title II are viable solutions to the authority issue, and seeks comment on the benefits of each approach, as well as the benefits of one approach over the other, to ensuring that the Internet remains an open platform for innovation and expression. With respect to your concerns about Title II reclassification creating regulatory and economic uncertainty, the Notice asks about the extent to which forbearance from certain provisions of the Act or our rules would be justified so that the regulatory treatment of broadband providers is appropriately balanced. This Notice is the first step in the process, and I look forward to comments from all interested stakeholders, including members of the general public, as we develop a fulsome record on the legal authority and many other questions raised in the Notice. To that end, in an effmi to maximize public participation in this proceeding, we have established an Open Internet email address- openinternet@fcc.gov - to ensure that Americans who may not otherwise have the opportunity to participate in an FCC proceeding can make their voices heard. In addition, to ensure sufficient opportunity for broad public comment, we have provided a lengthy comment and reply period that will give everyone an oppo1iunity to participate. Again, I appreciate your deep interest in this matter and look forward to a continued engagement with you and others in Congress as we move forward with this proceeding. Sincerelt/~~ -~ · , Tom Wheeler FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN The Honorable Kevin McCarthy U.S. House ofRepresentatives 2421 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Representative McCarthy: June 17, 2014 Thank you for contacting me with your views regarding the Commission' s efforts to reinstate rules to preserve and protect the Open Internet. As you know, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ("Notice") adopted by the Commission in May 2014 proposes rules that would replace those struck down early this year by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in its Verizon decision, and we ask a number of questions about the appropriate legal foundation for such rules. Your letter touches on some of the most important issues presented in the Notice , and it will be included in the record ofthe proceeding and considered as part of the Commission' s revww. The Commission has been working for more than a decade to safeguard the Open Internet. While there has been a bipartisan consensus, starting under the Bush Administration with Chairman Powell, on the imp01iance of an open Internet to economic growth, investment, and innovation, we find ourselves today without any rules in place to protect and promote Internet openness. The status quo is unacceptable. Unless and until the FCC adopts new rules, broadband providers will be free to block, degrade, or otherwise disadvantage innovative services on the Internet without threat of sanction by the FCC. This is unhealthy for investment, damaging to im1ovation, and, ultimately, bad for the future of the Internet. As Chairman, I will utilize the best tools available to me to ensure the Commission adopts effective and resilient open Internet rules. The court' s decision in Verizon established unequivocally that the Commission has the legal authority under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to craft enforceable rules to protect and promote an open Internet for all Americans. In particular, the court agreed with the Commission' s conclusion that an open Internet enables a virtuous cycle of investment and broadband deployment - i.e. , that innovative content and services at the edges of the network drive consumer demand for broadband services, which drives investment in broadband infrastructure and deployment, which drives more innovation at the network ' s edges, and so on. The court affirmed that it is the Commission' s responsibility to protect this virtuous cycle and that Section 706 authorizes us to do so. I believe that the Section 706 framework set forth by the court provides us with the tools we need to adopt and implement robust and enforceable Open Internet rules. For this reason, the Page 2-The Honorable Kevin McCarthy Notice used the court's legal blueprint as a starting point. Nevertheless, the Commission also is seriously considering the use of Title II of the Communications Act as the basis for legal authority. The Notice explains that both Section 706 and Title II are viable solutions to the authority issue, and seeks comment on the benefits of each approach, as well as the benefits of one approach over the other, to ensuring that the Internet remains an open platform for innovation and expression. With respect to your concerns about Title II reclassification creating regulatory and economic uncertainty, the Notice asks about the extent to which forbearance from certain provisions of the Act or our rules would be justified so that the regulatory treatment of broadband providers is appropriately balanced. This Notice is the first step in the process, and I look forward to comments from all interested stakeholders, including members of the general public, as we develop a fulsome record on the legal authority and many other questions raised in the Notice. To that end, in an effort to maximize public participation in this proceeding, we have established an Open Internet email address - openinternet@fcc.gov - to ensure that Americans who may not otherwise have the opportunity to participate in an FCC proceeding can make their voices heard. In addition, to ensure sufficient opportunity for broad public comment, we have provided a lengthy comment and reply period that will give everyone an oppmiunity to participate. Again, I appreciate your deep interest in this matter and look forward to a continued engagement with you and others in Congress as we move forward with this proceeding. sincerely'Ut/ ~eeler FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN The Honorable Eric Cantor U.S. House ofRepresentatives 303 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Representative Cantor: June 17, 2014 Thank you for contacting me with your views regarding the Commission's efforts to reinstate rules to preserve and protect the Open Internet. As you know, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ("Notice") adopted by the Commission in May 2014 proposes rules that would replace those struck down early this year by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in its Verizon decision, and we ask a number of questions about the appropriate legal foundation for such rules . Your letter touches on some of the most important issues presented in the Notice, and it will be included in the record ofthe proceeding and considered as part of the Commission's review. The Commission has been working for more than a decade to safeguard the Open Internet. While there has been a bipmiisan consensus, starting under the Bush Administration with Chairman Powell, on the importance of an open Internet to economic growth, investment, and innovation, we find ourselves today without any rules in place to protect and promote Internet openness. The status quo is unacceptable. Unless and until the FCC adopts new rules, broadband providers will be free to block, degrade, or otherwise disadvantage innovative services on the Internet without threat of sanction by the FCC. This is unhealthy for investment, damaging to innovation, and, ultimately, bad for the future of the Internet. As Chairman, I will utilize the best tools available to me to ensure the Commission adopts effective and resilient open Internet rules. The court's decision in Verizon established unequivocally that the Commission has the legal authority under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to craft enforceable rules to protect and promote an open Internet for all Americans. In pmiicular, the court agreed with the Commission' s conclusion that an open Internet enables a vi1iuous cycle of investment and broadband deployment - i.e., that innovative content and services at the edges of the network drive consumer demand for broadband services, which drives investment in broadband infrastructure and deployment, which drives more innovation at the network's edges, and so on. The court affirmed that it is the Commission's responsibility to protect this virtuous cycle and that Section 706 authorizes us to do so. I believe that the Section 706 framework set fmih by the court provides us with the tools we need to adopt and implement robust and enforceable Open Internet rules. For this reason, the Page 2-The Honorable Eric Cantor Notice used the court's legal blueprint as a starting point. Nevertheless, the Commission also is seriously considering the use ofTitle II of the Communications Act as the basis for legal authority. The Notice explains that both Section 706 and Title II are viable solutions to the authority issue, and seeks comment on the benefits of each approach, as well as the benefits of one approach over the other, to ensuring that the Internet remains an open platform for innovation and expression. With respect to your concerns about Title II reclassification creating regulatory and economic uncertainty, the Notice asks about the extent to which forbearance from certain provisions of the Act or our rules would be justified so that the regulatory treatment of broadband providers is appropriately balanced. This Notice is the first step in the process, and I look forward to comments from all interested stakeholders, including members of the general public, as we develop a fulsome record on the legal authority and many other questions raised in the Notice . To that end, in an effmt to maximize public participation in this proceeding, we have established an Open Internet email address - openinternet@fcc. gov - to ensure that Americans who may not otherwise have the opportunity to participate in an FCC proceeding can make their voices heard. In addition, to ensure sufficient opportunity for broad public comment, we have provided a lengthy comment and reply period that will give everyone an opportunity to participate. Again, I appreciate your deep interest in this matter and look forward to a continued engagement with you and others in Congress as we move forward with this proceeding. 'Sincerj/L ~eeler