A Florida Senate committee combined House bills requiring age verification for those accessing social media (HB-1) and pornography (HB-3). At a Thursday hearing, the Fiscal Policy Committee on a voice vote approved an amendment that inserts the text of HB-3 into HB-1 and makes other changes. Then the panel cleared the amended bill. The Senate could vote on the bill Wednesday. Opposing the bill in committee, Sen. Geri Thompson (D) said legislators’ role is education, not censorship. Sen. Shev Johnson (D) said it’s not lawmakers’ role to parent the parents, and the bill doesn’t pass legal muster. Added Sen. Lori Berman (D), HB-1 has many practical problems, including that it would force adults to verify their age on many websites and its breadth could bar children from accessing educational sites. Yet Sen. Erin Grall (R), who is shepherding HB-1 in the Senate, said Florida isn’t suggesting it knows better than parents. The state is narrowly responding to an identified harm, she said. "This is a bill about not targeting our children in order to manipulate them." The new version of HB-1 continues to propose prohibiting children younger than 16 from having social media accounts regardless of parental consent but no longer would require social websites to disclose social media's possible mental health problems to those 16-18. The amended bill allows enforcement by the attorney general and through a private right of action. Other changes to bill definitions could mean that young people will also be banned from Amazon, LinkedIn and news websites, said Maxx Fenning, executive director of PRISM, an LGBTQ rights group in Florida. In addition, the American Civil Liberties Union opposed the bill. Banning kids younger than 16 even with their parents' consent "shows that the claim of parental rights of the last two legislative sessions had nothing to do with parental rights and everything to do with government censorship of viewpoints and information that government doesn't like,” ACLU-Florida Legislative Director Kara Gross said.
Adam Bender
Adam Bender, Senior Editor, is the state and local telecommunications reporter for Communications Daily, where he also has covered Congress and the Federal Communications Commission. He has won awards for his Warren Communications News reporting from the Society of Professional Journalists, Specialized Information Publishers Association and the Society for Advancing Business Editing and Writing. Bender studied print journalism at American University and is the author of dystopian science-fiction novels. You can follow Bender at WatchAdam.blog and @WatchAdam on Twitter.
Pennsylvania’s biggest incumbent, Verizon, launched an all-out attack on state USF in comments Friday, urging that the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission eliminate the fund. The carrier said the USF is archaic. In addition, AT&T joined Verizon in urging the PUC to reduce regulations, such as carrier of last resort (COLR) obligations. However, rural LECs argued that they will continue needing state USF support for as long as Pennsylvania heavily regulates them.
Nebraska legislators were skeptical during a livestreamed hearing Monday about a bill transferring state broadband grant duties to the Nebraska Broadband Office from the Public Service Commission (see 2401180020). The legislature’s Telecom Committee heard testimony on LB-1336. “I do not expect this bill to go anywhere," conceded sponsor Sen. Barry DeKay (R). But he said he wanted to start a discussion about whether there could be efficiencies moving the Nebraska Broadband Bridge Program to the office that is handling the broadband, equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program, he said. Legislators last year required the PSC to transfer BEAD authority to the broadband office, which was created in January 2023. Sen. Michaela Cavanaugh (D) is concerned that LB-1336 would erode the PSC, an agency that is far more transparent than the broadband office, she said. Sen. Tom Brandt (R) asked, "What do we as a state gain by moving this over to the broadband office?" While officially neutral on the bill, Nebraska PSC Commissioner Tim Schram (R) said his agency has “a proven record of three grant cycles” administering the broadband bridge program transparently and at a low cost. The bill isn’t clear on how the transition would occur, added Schram. The Nebraska Telecommunications Association opposed the bill since it is “generally pleased” with PSC administration of the bridge program, said President Tip O’Neill: And the broadband office is busy getting BEAD off the ground. The Nebraska Association of County Officials thinks it’s a good idea to eliminate redundancies, said Elaine Menzel, Nebraska Association of County Officials legal counsel. Also at the hearing, county and municipal officials opposed a bill that would expand state preemption of local government authority. The state already has a law limiting local fees and timelines for small-cell wireless deployments; LB-1112 would cover other broadband equipment on poles and towers. A single state policy isn’t appropriate for circumstances that vary locality by locality, said Lash Chaffin, League of Nebraska Municipalities utilities section director. The bill would restrict cities’ ability to ensure equipment and installations don’t harm health and safety, said Valerie Grimes, planning and development director for Norfolk, Nebraska. LB-1112 sponsor Sen. Robert Clements (R) said his bill would speed broadband deployment by lowering fees and delays.
The Utah Commerce Department received backlash from the communications industry and other groups about age-verification methods proposed in rules for implementing the 2023 Utah Social Media Regulation Act. The department’s Consumer Protection Division last week sent us written comments received by its Feb. 5 deadline on October's proposed rules.
California could be first in the nation to codify the FCC’s definition of digital discrimination into state law. Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D) introduced AB-2239 on Wednesday, the California Alliance for Digital Equity said Thursday. “This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to adopt subsequent legislation that codifies a definition of ‘digital discrimination of access’ in state law that conforms to the definition adopted by the Federal Communications Commission,” said a legislative digest on the measure. In a November order (see 2311150040), the FCC defined “digital discrimination of access” as “policies or practices, not justified by genuine issues of technical or economic feasibility, that (1) differentially impact consumers' access to broadband internet access service based on their income level, race, ethnicity, color, religion, or national origin or (2) are intended to have such differential impact.” Defining digital discrimination could help move a proceeding on digital redlining at the California Public Utilities Commission, said Shayna Englin, California Community Foundation director-digital equity initiative, in an interview. The proceeding stalled amid argument about the definition, said Englin. CPUC digital redlining rules would guide the agency in the years ahead as it distributes $8 billion state and federal broadband funding, she said. Englin predicted a fight between digital equity advocates and the telecom industry, which is expected to oppose AB-2239. The California Broadband and Video Association is reviewing the legislation, said a spokesperson for the state cable group. USTelecom declined to comment. The Los Angeles City Council passed a similar law at the local level last month.
District of Columbia Council members demanded more transparency from Washington’s 911 center about its handling of call-taking and dispatching errors. The D.C. Council Judiciary and Public Safety Committee held a livestreamed oversight hearing Thursday about the Office of Unified Communications, which has received much scrutiny over incidents where incorrect addresses and miscommunication prompted dispatching delays. A former, longtime OUC employee claimed the office engages in unfair labor practices.
The Oklahoma Corporation Commission unanimously supported revising various telecom rules at a Thursday meeting. In three separate 3-0 votes, the commission supported staff’s proposed changes to Chapter 55 rules for telecom services (docket RM2023-000017), Chapter 56 rules for interexchange telecom service resellers (RM2023-000018) and Chapter 57 rules for operator service providers telecom services (RM2023-000019). During the meeting, the commission slightly modified the Chapter 55 proposal to remove a sentence related to submitting changes to a company’s principal business address. The removed sentence read, "The submission shall be accompanied by an attestation that the tariff and/or Terms of Service are identical, except for the address change to the existing tariffs and/or Terms of Service."
The telecom industry pushed back on a Vermont state bill that could shake up state USF contribution and telecom taxation. At a House Ways and Means Committee hearing streamed Wednesday, a wireless industry lobbyist said a proposed shift to connections-based USF contribution mechanism unfairly shifted costs to wireless customers. A New England Connectivity and Telecommunications Association (NECTA) lobbyist, representing the region’s cable industry, condemned a possible $15 annual tax on each pole attachment owned by private communications providers. Community media representatives supported the proposed tax for supporting public, educational and governmental (PEG) channels.
State broadband officials shed some light Tuesday into NTIA’s process for recommending changes to states’ broadband, equity, access and deployment (BEAD) initial plans. NTIA’s so-called “curing" process lacks the transparency from earlier in the process when states sought public comments on drafts, some state and industry officials said during an FCBA webinar. States said they expect to use a mix of network technologies to reach everyone who needs high-speed internet.
A New York state Senate data privacy bill cleared the Consumer Protection Committee for the second straight year during a livestreamed hearing Tuesday. In a voice vote, the panel supported advancing S-365 to the Internet and Technology Committee. The comprehensive measure by Consumer Protection Chair Kevin Thomas (D) passed the full Senate last year (see 2306090052). However, because the Assembly didn’t take it up in 2023, the bill returned to the Senate on Jan. 3. “It’s a bill that is necessary, especially since AI is generating so much right now,” said Thomas. “Data privacy goes first, and then the guardrails need to be set on AI.” Later in the morning, the Senate Telecom Committee unanimously cleared a cable prorating bill by Sen. Leroy Comrie (D), sending it to the Senate floor. S-493 would allow cable customers to seek a prorated refund if their service was disconnected or downgraded. The legislation received the committee’s approval last year (see 2305160033) but returned to the panel Jan. 3 because the full Senate didn’t vote on it in 2023. On Monday, the Telecom Committee sent a bill (S-1203) to the floor that would prohibit broadband terminations and disconnections during state disaster emergencies.