Preventing ISPs From Blocking or Throttling Content While Allowing Paid Prioritization (H.R. 4682)

What is H.R. 4682?

(Updated June 21, 2020)

This bill — known as the Open Internet Preservation Act — would prohibit internet service providers (ISPs) from blocking legal content or services and from impairing or “throttling” internet traffic on the basis of content. ISPs would be allowed to offer specialized services (like paid prioritization) but couldn’t offer them in ways that threaten the meaningful availability of broadband internet or are designed to evade the prohibitions imposed by this bill.

States and their political subdivisions would be prohibited from enforcing a law or rule related to internet openness obligations in providing broadband internet service, meaning that this federal law would preempt state law.

Broadband internet service would be considered an “information service” under Title II of the Communications Act, effectively blocking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from attempting to re-impose net neutrality rules in the same manner it did in 2015.

Argument in favor

This bill strikes an appropriate balance between ensuring that ISPs can’t block or throttle content on the internet while allowing for innovative services like paid prioritization to be attempted.

Argument opposed

This bill doesn’t go nearly far enough in terms of re-imposing net neutrality rules, as paid prioritization of content should not be allowed. States should be able to make their own open internet standards.

Impact

Internet users; ISPs; states; and the FCC.

Cost of H.R. 4682

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

Additional Info

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) tweeted the following regarding her bill to prohibit the blocking or throttling of internet traffic based on content while allowing paid prioritization:

“No blocking. No throttling. The Open Internet Preservation Act will ensure the internet is a free and open space. This legislation is simple, it provides light-touch regulation so companies can invest and innovate, and make sure our internet is up to 21st century standards.”

Net neutrality advocates have expressed opposition to this bill, with Fight for the Future’s Campaigns Director Evan Greer writing:

“This is not real net neutrality legislation. It’s a poorly disguised slap in the face of internet users from across the political spectrum. Blackburn’s bill would explicitly allow Internet providers to demand new fees from small businesses and Internet users, carving up the web into fast lanes and slow lanes.”

This legislation has the support of 15 cosponsors in the House, all of whom are Republicans.

Media:

• House Energy & Commerce Committee Press Release
  
• Broadcasting & Cable
  
• Slate
  
• The Verge
  
• Washington Post
  
• Gizmodo (Opposed)