Since a federal court ruled last month that the Federal Communications Commission can no longer enforce its policy of network neutrality — which ensures that Internet service providers provide the same quality of service to all websites — Democratic lawmakers have been busy searching for a way to keep the rules in place through new legislation.

But with the telecommunications lobby’s history of fighting hard against earlier such bills, and the possibility that at least one technology company could change its tune on the subject, the current push will face a difficult slog.

Technology companies and open Internet advocates tend to favor net neutrality, as it prevents Internet providers from giving preferential service to any website, no matter the size or the amount of bandwidth it uses.

The telecommunications industry, meanwhile, is generally against the policy; it argues that service providers should be able to control their own bandwidth and allow some websites to move their content through the Internet faster.

This isn’t a new debate. The FCC crafted its current rules in 2010 and pushed them out the next year after months of debate. Lawmakers split on the regs, some saying they were too zealous and others arguing they should have been tougher.

In fact, the FCC rules resulted from Congress’ failure to act. The push for net neutrality started in 2006, when Democratic lawmakers introduced bills in both the House and Senate forbidding Internet service providers from giving preference to chosen websites. As expected, the industries that lobbied hardest on the bills were technology and telecommunications.

On the technology side, Amazon.com and eBay were particularly involved, listing the bills in their 2006 disclosure reports five and nine times, respectively. Telecommunications had a say, too, with AT&T listing the bills five times in its disclosure reports and Verizon naming them three times. Both bills stalled out in committee and never came to a vote.

But shortly thereafter, the lobbying power shifted, with the telecommunications industry becoming a much more dominant player on, for instance, a 2008 Senate bill sponsored by then-Sen. Olympia Snowe and a 2009 House bill sponsored by Reps. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.).

Fifty-three companies and organizations lobbied the 2008 Senate bill, and of the 10 groups that listed the bill most frequently in their disclosure reports, eight were in the telecommunications industry. Topping the list was Verizon, which named the bill 21 times, and the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, which listed it 19 times. Only two tech companies – eBay and Amazon – made the top 10, listing the bill in their disclosure reports nine and 10 times, respectively.

Help us keep government accountable by making a donation today.

Lobbying was just as lopsided for the 2009 House bill. Seven of the eight companies listing the bill most often in 2009 and 2010 were in the telecommunications industry. The only technology company to crack the top eight was Google, which mentioned the bill a combined 10 times over two years.

Current bills

It’s still unknown which groups will lobby on the new House and Senate proposals, but one major technology company may be in play, a development that could seriously damage the pro-net neutrality efforts.

Over the past three years, Google — through its Google Fiber program — has become an Internet service provider itself, with plans to bring its own high-speed service to places like Austin, Texas and Provo, Utah.



That’s led to speculation by technology analysts, fueled by language in Google Fiber’s terms of service, that the company may not be the strong advocate for net neutrality it has been in the past. That could be a huge loss to the cause, as the company has become a heavyweight in Washington over the past few years, spending more than $34 million on lobbying in 2012 and 2013 combined.

One company that might be able to replace some of Google’s heft is Netflix, which has increased its lobbying every year since 2009. Net neutrality is particularly important to the streaming video provider; at peak times, it uses up to one-third of all bandwidth in North America.

Without net neutrality, Internet service providers could force Netflix to pay extra to use so much bandwidth. The company’s 2013 lobbying budget was only $1.2 million, about a tenth of Google’s. But Netflix may choose to push especially hard on this issue due to how much it could cost the company if the legislation fails.

The major parties likely to take part in the debate have deep pockets. Verizon spent nearly $14 million on lobbying last year. Other telecommunications companies against net neutrality include the soon-to-be merged Comcast and Time Warner Cable, which spent about $19 million and $8 million on lobbying respectively last year.

And even if the pro-net neutrality movement doesn’t have Google, it will still have large companies like Microsoft , which has been involved in previous bills and spent more than $10 million on lobbying in 2013. Follow Robbie on Twitter at @robbiefeinberg



For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center: Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics.For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center: [email protected]





Support Accountability Journalism At OpenSecrets.org we offer in-depth, money-in-politics stories in the public interest. Whether you’re reading about 2020 presidential fundraising, conflicts of interest or “dark money” influence, we produce this content with a small, but dedicated team. Every donation we receive from users like you goes directly into promoting high-quality data analysis and investigative journalism that you can trust.Please support our work and keep this resource free. Thank you. Support OpenSecrets ➜