The following amendments were offered:
TITLE I - National Cable Franchising
An amendment offered by Mr. Barton, #1, Manager's Amendment, was adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Ms. Solis, Messrs. Dingell and Markey, #2, establishing market-based incremental service requirements for national franchisees for their use of the public rights-of-way, was defeated by a yea-nay vote: 22 - 33;
An amendment offered by Mr. Stearns, #3, regarding itemization of provider recovery of PEG and I-Net financial support, was adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Mr. Waxman, #4, prohibiting a cable operator with a national franchise from denying or offering inferior access to its cable service to any group of potential or current residential cable service subscribers in a manner that has the purpose or effect of discriminating against that group on the basis of the income of that group, was defeated by a yea-nay vote: 22 - 29;
An amendment offered by Ms. Solis, #5, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of the race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or income of that group, was defeated by a yea-nay vote: 23 - 28;
An amendment offered by Mr. Dingell, #6, requiring a national francisee to certify compliance with municipal rights-of-way requirements; clarifying that the FCC will not resolve rights-of-way disputes; clarifying gross revenues definition; establishing fee dispute resolution procedures; and requiring the FCC to consult with franchising authorities in establishing rules, was defeated by a yea-nay vote: 23 - 30;
An amendment offered by Mr. Doyle, #7, expanding local enforcement of national franchisees; enabling the FCC to order refunds to the consumer; clarifying the complaint appeal process with the FCC; and requiring a report from the FCC on the number and types of complaints filed with local governments and the FCC, was defeated by a yea-nay vote: 23 - 28;
An amendment offered by Ms. Baldwin, #8, providing that, on request of an affected potential residental subscriber, the franchising authority may initiate a proceeding to investigate and issue a decision on the violation of the anti-discrimination section of the bill, which may be appealed to the FCC within 120 days, was defeated by a yea-nay vote: 20 - 28;
An amendment offered by Mr. Wynn, #9, requiring the operator to comply with additional consumer protection rules and requiring the FCC to identify with specificity what constitutes a violation of consumer protection standards and damages that may be imposed for such violations, was adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Ms. Eshoo, #10, clarifying the statutory definition of "cable service" to ensure that IP video offerings are covered by existing cable law as well as this legislation, was withdrawn;
Two amendments offered en bloc by Mr. Green, #11, (1) adding an affirmative declaration by the cable operator that the operator will comply with the rights-of-way requirements of the franchising authority to the operator's national franchise certification; (2) requiring the FCC's enforcement of the anti-discrimination access extension remedy to be "within a reasonable time", were adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment by Ms. Schakowsky, #12, striking the "national standard" for consumer protections and replacing it with one that says that States and localities can establish consumer protections for cable franchisers that are either of general applicability or not inconsistent with express national consumer protection or customer service rules issued by the FCC, was withdrawn;
Two amendments offered en bloc by Mr. Allen, #13, (1) requiring the FCC to report on the progress of a cable operator who is an incumbent local exchange carrier in deploying non-video broadband in the operator's telephone service territory; (2) requiring the FCC to report on the ratio of rural/urban households with cable service and the ratio of rural/urban households without cable service, a state-by-state breakdown of the data, and comparisons with each State's rural/urban ratio, were adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Mr. Inslee, #14, allowing state attorneys general to receive complaints for violations of Federal consumer protection rules, and then to take civil action against the national franchise holder in state court if state law permits such action, was withdrawn;
An amendment offered by Messrs. Pickering and Pallone, #15, re: effectiveness and eligibility of existing cable operators for a national franchise, was adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Ms. Baldwin and Mrs. Wilson, #16, requiring a cable operator with a national franchise to pay annually, whichever is greater, an amount equal to 1 percent of the cable operator's annual gross revenue in that franchise area or a fee equivalent to the value, on a per subscriber, per month basis, of all PEG support currently provided by an incumbent cable operator in a franchise area pursuant to that incumbent's existing franchise agreement, was defeated by a yea-nay vote: 19 - 20.
TITLE II - Enforcement of Broadband Policy Statement
An amendment offered by Messrs. Markey and Boucher, Ms. Eshoo, and Mr. Inslee, #17, establishing network neutrality requirements and an expedited complaint process, was defeated by a yea-nay vote: 22 - 34.
TITLE III - VOIP/911
An amendment offered by Mr. Stearns, #18, re: notification with respect to alarm monitoring systems, was adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Messrs. Gordon, Pickering, Shimkus, Ms. Eshoo, and Mr. Ferguson, #19, (1) making technical corrections to Title III, and (2) creating a new customer 911 deployment transition period for unserved areas where a VOIP provider is not yet connected to a selective router and does not yet serve any customer, was adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Mr. Stupak, #20, providing that nothing in the Act shall be construed to exempt a VOIP service provider from requirements imposed by the FCC or state commission on all VOIP service providers to (1) pay appropriate inter-carrier compensation and (2) contribute to the Universal Service Fund, was defeated by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Mr. Inslee, #21, providing for disability access to VOIP service and equipment, was adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Mr. Pickering, #31, clarifying treatment of VOIP service for purposes of interconnection, was adopted by a voice vote.
A unanimous consent request by Mr. Stearns that the Stearns amendment to Title III, which was adopted by a voice vote (but was voided by the subsequent approval of the Gordon-Pickering-Shimkus-Eshoo-Ferguson amendment), be considered as adopted to Title III, was agreed to with no objection;
Title IV - Municipal Provision of Services
An amendment offered by Mr. Buyer, #22, providing that, not later than one year after the date of enactment of this legislation, the FCC shall submit to the Congress a report on the status of the provision of telecommunications service, information service, and cable service by States and localities, was adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Mr. Terry, #23, providing that nothing in section 401 of the bill shall affect any State law, rule, regulation or legal requirement that is in effect on the date of enactment of the section and that governs, applies to, limits, restricts, or establishes requirements relating to, the provision of telecommunications, telecommunications service, information service, or cable service by a public provider, was defeated by a voice vote.
TITLE V - Broadband Service
An amendment offered by Mr. Ross, #25, requiring the FCC, within 90 days after the date of enactment, to conduct a study of the interference potential of broadband over power line systems, was adopted by a voice vote;
An amendment offered by Messrs. Pickering and Boucher, #26, regarding inclusion of VOIP service as a stand-alone broadband service and stating that the term 'VOIP service' has the meaning given such term by section 716(j), was adopted by a voice vote.
Additional Amendments - New Titles
An amendment offered by Mrs. Blackburn, Messrs. Boucher and Inslee, #24, adding a new title at the end of the bill: Title VI -- Wireless Services, was withdrawn;
An amendment offered by Ms. DeGette, #27, making Internet service providers retain information about subscribers for at least one year, was withdrawn;
An amendment offered by Messrs. Stearns and Boucher, #28, providing that advanced Internet communications services are subject to exclusive Federal jurisdiction, was withdrawn;
An amendment offered by Mr. Gonzalez, #29, requiring the FCC to submit a report on the preferential pricing practices of the top five by usage Internet search engines and the top five by revenue e-commerce sites, was defeated by a yea-nay vote: 11 - 43;
An amendment offered by Messrs. Shimkus and Inslee, #30, regarding the development of seamless mobility, was adopted by a voice vote.
