Broadband and Telecommunications Reform

BROADBAND AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS REFORM

Mr. SUNUNU. Mr. President, I want to begin by thanking Senator Alexander, as well as Senators WYDEN and ALLEN, who have worked on the consensus legislation that was touched on in earlier remarks, a final piece of the legislation necessary to ensure that we do not tax Internet access.

The reason we do this, the reason we think this legislation is so important is, first and foremost, because these are national and global broadband networks. They are interstate and global in nature. I believe the responsibility for both determining the tax status and the regulatory status of these networks falls on the Federal Government. I do believe taxation is merely an extension of regulatory power, in that it has the ability to shape the playing field, to weight the competition among ideas or technology in one direction or another. As was said many years ago, when you tax something, you get less of it. If that is not a form of regulation, I don't know what is.

The issue of broadband voice, of Internet protocol voice services was also mentioned. I do want to be clear, at least in expressing an opinion if not declaring it absolute fact: The Internet tax legislation that we passed was silent on this issue. It doesn't allow or disallow, per se, the taxation on Internet protocol, IP voice service, or broadband voice service. But what it does is protect Internet access, access to that broadband pipe from taxation.

We will discuss and debate in greater detail in the coming year the nature of these broadband voice services-broadband access, spectrum regulations-as we develop telecom legislation in 2005, beginning with hearings and work in the Commerce Committee. I think in many ways the FCC has already set the direction for this process in a recent ruling that they made, which was to say that broadband voice services using the Internet protocol are interstate in nature and that they should be regulated on a national level for many of the reasons that Senator Alexander has outlined. We want clarity; we want consistency; we don't want it weighted toward one technology or another.

There are lots of ways to get access to these national and global broadband networks. You can get them through wireless systems, DSL, cable. You can get them even through satellite. And there are probably more technologies that will come to give customers and consumers access. We want to be careful that we do not distort the marketplace of ideas, either through subsidies for one form of technology relative to another-which was mentioned by Senator Alexander-or regulatory regimes on one form of broadband network relative to another.

It will be a challenging debate. I think Senator Alexander has been very helpful in this debate in bringing the perspective of a Governor. I think we do need to be very sensitive to the rights and the powers of the States. But where we have something that is interstate, national, or global in nature, then I think it does make sense to try to find a light regulatory touch, as Senator Alexander has described, but one that is clearly defined and that will keep the competitive playing field as open and vigorous as possible. If we have a strong economy, then I think the governments at the local level, the State level, and the Federal level will do fine so far as revenue collection is concerned.

I look forward to participating in this debate with other members on the Commerce Committee and all of the Members in the Senate in order to make sure that we have a regulatory system that is designed for, so to speak, the 21st century, these new technologies, and not just take a regulatory system that was designed for a copper circuit switch phone system, invented by Alexander Graham Bell-don't take that regulatory system and try to force it on emerging technologies for the future.

I yield the floor.