New Hampshire’s attorney general's office can’t effectively enforce a proposed privacy law without more resources, Consumer Protection and Antitrust Bureau Chief Brandon Garod said Wednesday. The state AG office doesn’t oppose the intent of SB-255, but even good consumer protection bills are "toothless" without enough manpower for enforcement, Garod told the state’s House Judiciary Committee at a livestreamed hearing, he said. “This bill has the potential to create an enormous amount of additional work for the bureau,” which may need another attorney investigator and paralegal to properly handle, he said. That’s “especially because ... the drafters have made the decision to eliminate the private right of action that is present in all other unfair and deceptive acts or practices cases that can currently be brought in the state.” Citing Garod’s concerns, Consumer Reports policy analyst Matt Schwartz suggested adding a private right of action and including additional appropriations for AG enforcement. The bill’s House co-sponsor Rep. Dave Luneau (D) noted his 2019 privacy bill, which passed the House but stalled in the Senate, contained a private right of action. Though SB-255 limits enforcement to the AG, it’s much more specific than the 2019 bill and sets strong standards including for clearer privacy notices, he said. Senate sponsor Sharon Carson (R) said her bill is a “meaningful first step” in providing privacy rights to consumers that’s modeled after Virginia, Colorado and Connecticut laws. Similar bills in Texas, Montana and Indiana are advancing, she said. Rep. Shaun Filiault (D), another co-sponsor, said the bill’s similarity to other laws is an asset. “We're not creating something new. We fortunately have the advantage of following in other states’ footsteps.” Microsoft Senior Director-Public Policy Ryan Harkins urged legislators to pass the bill. The committee is scheduled to vote on SB-255 May 3 at 9 a.m.
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.
Fiber and wireless proponents faced off in comments this week on a California Public Utilities Commission rulemaking to develop state rules for distributing dollars from NTIA’s broadband, equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program (docket R.23-02-016). They disagreed on how high California should set its Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold (EHCT), which will be used to determine what areas can get non-fiber broadband service. Commenters also debated how much the CPUC should add to requirements from the BEAD notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) and how much the state agency should rely on the FCC’s national map to determine what areas are served.
PHILADELPHIA -- Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) challenged state enforcers Tuesday to collaboratively address privacy and social media issues, speaking at a National Association of Attorneys General meeting. North Carolina AG Josh Stein (D) asked an algorithms panel later for suggestions on what states can do amid a rise of AI chatbots like ChatGPT.
State and local coordination will be key to covering New Jersey with broadband, said government officials at the state’s internet-for-all workshop Monday. The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (BPU) will be the "gatekeepers on where this money goes throughout the state, and if we don't work with them, that means some other states are getting our money,” said Piscataway Township Mayor Brian Wahler (D) at the partially virtual event. The New Jersey League of Municipalities past president stressed the need for a good relationship. “Work with the BPU for once,” he urged local governments. “They're not the enemy, they're actually going to be the saviors here to get the broadband to us.” BPU Broadband Director Valarry Bullard said “2023 is the year of planning,” which “requires a commitment from all industries.” High-speed internet is new to the BPU, acknowledged Chief of Staff Taryn Boland. "We've traditionally been focused on gas, electric, water, telco and cable, and now we are dipping our toes in the broadband water.” In its national role overseeing Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act broadband funding, NTIA will be looking for state plans that show coordination with local governments, noted Administrator Alan Davidson in recorded remarks: "It is local community leaders ... who will know best how to solve this problem.”
Alaska USF’s last distribution would come in January under a tentative schedule presented Wednesday by the Alaska Universal Service Administrative Co. (AUSAC). The company could dissolve soon after, AUSAC Agent Keegan Bernier told commissioners at a livestreamed Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) meeting. AUSAC is preparing for sunset of Alaska USF regulations June 30. The final AUSF remittance would happen in July. AUSAC would distribute $1 million that month and then $77,000 in January before the company wound down. Some are looking for options to renew AUSF before it ends (see 2304110015), but at Wednesday's meeting Commissioner Robert Pickett sounded pessimistic about saving the fund: "We've been told this program essentially is going to be terminated and there are no ... realistic options." Later in the meeting, Pickett predicted "a series of events in which rural LECs are going to have a difficult time and then it will become a political emergency" that could lead to a legislative response. The problem of keeping rural phone rates low "needs a different mechanism that makes sense," he added. Multiple commissioners said they struggled to see how they could classify the looming AUSF sunset as an emergency, a procedural move that would let them expedite making new rules. Chair Keith Kurber and Commissioner Bob Doyle said they first want to see comments due May 5 on repealing AUSF regulations.
The Texas Cable Association supports amending a bill about municipal broadband confidentiality to clarify it would cover one entity -- Greenville Electric Utility System -- rather than any municipal broadband provider, said TCA President Walt Baum at a Texas Senate Commerce Committee hearing livestreamed Tuesday. The panel weighed but didn’t vote on SB-983, which would allow the public utility to privately discuss competitive matters involving cable, internet or broadband service. The cable association was opposed to the bill until sponsor Sen. Angela Paxton (R) offered the clarification as a substitute amendment, said Baum. TCA remains concerned about cross-subsidization -- electric revenue supporting the telecom side of the business, said Baum. Lawmakers should further revise the bill to clarify that the utility may not keep private whether it’s keeping its books separate, he said.
Alaska USF’s possible June 30 termination is raising concerns and producing much discussion among industry and consumer advocates in the state. A spokesperson for Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R) told us the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) may decide the fate of AUSF, which was established to keep phone rates low in high-cost rural areas. If those dollars go away, “somebody has to pay those costs, and the somebody is most likely going to be those rural ratepayers,” said Alaska Chief Assistant Attorney General Jeff Waller in an interview Friday.
More areas are eligible for state broadband funding under the California Public Utilities Commission’s more granular mapping approach for 2023, CPUC officials said Monday. The CPUC held a California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) virtual workshop with ISPs, consumers, local governments, and regional consortia. “The validation process we’re using for CASF … is more rigorous and more responsive to the reality on the ground than what we’re seeing at the federal level,” said Communications Division Director Robert Osborn.
Public advocates objected to AT&T seeking relief of carrier of last resort (COLR) and other obligations last week. Rural counties objected to the carrier’s application earlier that week (see 2304040030). “AT&T seeks wholesale permission to abandon the guarantee of communications services for an unspecified number of its customers in unknowable areas simultaneously, and in bulk,” said the CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office. AT&T incorrectly argues that COLR obligations require it to maintain copper, diverting resources from fiber, said PAO: But COLR is technology-neutral. And AT&T’s application breaks with California USF rules, it said. “The Application is so unclear, vague, and factually insufficient that the Commission cannot even begin to determine whether AT&T’s request is in the public interest.” The Utility Reform Network (TURN) and Center for Accessible Technology (CforAT) jointly agreed with PAO that the CPUC should reject the AT&T application. “AT&T has failed to clearly identify which customers, and which areas of its service territory would lose COLR protections,” TURN and CforAT said. “The Commission should not make a determination based on a minimal showing of customer impact for such an important fundamental obligation.” AT&T "submitted applications with the CPUC to start the process for an orderly transition from outdated, copper-based telephone services and network to broadband communications networks," an AT&T spokesperson said. "The proceeding should not be delayed because Californians will be disadvantaged if the network modernization is hampered by outdated regulations of legacy telephone service." AT&T is "firmly committed to ensuring all its customers will continue to have access to reliable voice service," the spokesperson added.
The telecom industry recoiled at the new direction for a California Public Utilities Commission rulemaking that previously focused on state USF charges. The CPUC has no business investigating provider-imposed charges, said phone, cable and wireless companies in comments Wednesday. Consumer advocates welcomed the review into discretionary charges they said aren’t always expected by customers.