Reaction to FCC chairman Julius Genachowski's decision to create net neutrality rules rolled in all day, but not everyone is happy. A Republican senator announced Monday afternoon that she has introduced a bill that would stop the FCC from spending money on new regulatory mandates.

Reaction to FCC chairman Julius Genachowski's decision to create net neutrality rules rolled in all day, but not everyone is happy. A Republican senator announced Monday afternoon that she has introduced a bill that would stop the FCC from spending money on new regulatory mandates.

"I am deeply concerned by the direction the FCC appears to be heading," Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Republican, said in a statement. "These new regulatory mandates and restrictions could stifle investment incentives."

Hutchison added an amendment to an Interior Appropriations bill that would ban the FCC from spending money to craft and implement regulatory changes. It is co-sponsored by Senators John Ensign of Nevada, Sam Brownback of Kansas, David Vitter of Louisiana, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, and John Thune of South Dakota, all Republicans.

The wireless industry, meanwhile, is questioning whether it should be included in the chairman's net neutrality rules at all.

Genachowski on Monday proposed an official rulemaking that would make two additions to the FCC's Internet policy principles, a set of four principles released by the agency in 2005 that serve as a framework for broadband Internet access.

The first addition would prevent ISPs from discriminating against particular Internet content or applications, while allowing for reasonable network management. The second addition would ensure that ISPs are transparent about network management.

The rules, he said, would apply to all types of Internet access  including wireless.

"The principles I've been speaking about apply to the Internet however accessed, and I will ask my fellow Commissioners to join me in confirming this," Genachowski said. "The rulemaking process will enable the Commission to analyze fully the implications of the principles for mobile network architectures and practices  and how, as a practical matter, they can be fairly and appropriately implemented."

The CTIA, which represents the wireless industry, voiced concern about the "unintended consequences" of regulating the mobile space.

"Unlike the other platforms that would be subject to the rules, the wireless industry is extremely competitive, extremely innovative, and extremely personal," Chris Guttman-McCabe, vice president of regulatory affairs for CTIA, said in a statement.

Guttman-McCabe questioned how the move would affect "the efforts from Apple and Android, Blackberry and Nokia, Firefly and others to differentiate the products and services they develop for consumers? Should all product and service offerings be the same?" he asked.

AT&T said it has similar concerns. The company voiced support for an open Internet, but warned against regulatory intervention in a healthy market.

AT&T would "be very disappointed if [the FCC] has already drawn a conclusion to regulate wireless services despite the absence of any compelling evidence of problems or abuse that would warrant government intervention," Jim Cicconi, AT&T's senior executive vice president of external and legislative affairs, said in a statement.

"Sprint Nextel agrees with Chairman Genachowski that consumers are well served by an open Internet," a spokesman for Sprint added. "That's why we offer consumers open handsets and have long worked with independent software developers who want to create applications for Sprint handsets. It's also why we're investing in the technology and deploying an open 4G network."

AT&T and CTIA also accused the FCC of a "bait and switch" when it comes to spectrum. In March 2008, AT&T spent $6.6 billion on 227 licenses of 700 MHz spectrum, licenses that were not included in the open-access C Block.

AT&T made its purchases "with specific assurances that it was not encumbered with such [open-access] regulations," Cicconi wrote. "For the FCC to now place such requirements on that spectrum could raise questions about the fairness and integrity of the auction process itself."

Though the Democratic commissioners issued their support for the plan, the Republican commissioners were not as pleased. They questioned whether Genachowski's announcement effectively invalidates last year's Comcast decision.

"Curiously, today's speech appears to admit that the Commission did not have enforceable rules at the time of last year's Comcast/BitTorrent decision while the Commission simultaneously files its appellate brief defending that decision," Robert McDowell and Meredith A. Baker said in a joint statement.

Last year, the FCC handed down an enforcement action against Comcast for unreasonable network management based on its Internet policy principles. Comcast argued that the principles were unenforceable because they had not gone through the official FCC rulemaking procedure, but the FCC, under former chairman Kevin Martin, was undeterred. Comcast is appealing the enforcement action.

In a Monday blog post, Comcast said it supports and honors the FCC's policy principles. Comcast is appealing the enforcement action, it said, "because the former FCC leadership simply handled the matter improperly."

Comcast rival Time Warner Cable said Genachowski's plan was "well thought out."

"There is nothing in the contents of it that we disagree with. We look forward to being an active participant in the process to determine what 'reasonable network management' is," the company said in a statement.

Free Press, which brought the network management complaint against Comcast, was pleased with the plan.

"The debate over net neutrality at times has felt like a marathon, but today the finish line is in sight," said Josh Silver, executive director of Free Press. "Chairman Genachowski's speech today shows the FCC intends to follow through on President Obama's pledge to protect the free and open Internet."

What's next?

Genachowski will unveil the specifics of his plan at the commission's October meeting. In the meantime, there is legislation pending in Congress that would require the FCC to keep a watchful eye on ISPs.

Rep. Edward Markey, the Massachusetts Democrat sponsoring that bill, issued his support for Genachowski's plan, but said he will still pursue his legislation.

"Rules put forward by the commission in this area would be a key complement to the bill that Chairman Waxman, Congresswoman Eshoo and I are advancing to codify these vital protections for consumers and innovators," Markey said.