Legislation that would ban rate regulation of Internet service providers could prevent the Federal Communications Commission from enforcing net neutrality rules against blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization, according to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler.

Although the FCC decided not to regulate the monthly prices charged by broadband providers, the commission's net neutrality rules rely partially on rate-oversight authority over common carriers. The relevant sections of the Communications Act say that the prices charged by common carriers have to be just and reasonable; those sections also ban "unreasonable discrimination" in charges and practices.

This rate-oversight power, along with other authority, was used by the FCC to justify the three so-called "bright-line" rules that prevent blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization. That's why the Republican-sponsored "No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act" could threaten the FCC's core net neutrality rules, Wheeler told lawmakers in a letter dated March 14 and posted on the FCC's website last week.

Wheeler wouldn't object to legislation that merely prevents traditional rate regulation from being imposed on ISPs, he wrote. But this bill "would introduce significant uncertainty into the Commission's ability to enforce the three bright line rules that bar blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization rules, as well as our general conduct rule that would be applied to issues such as data caps and zero rating," Wheeler wrote. "It would also cast doubt on the ability of the Commission to ensure that broadband providers receiving universal service subsidies do not overcharge their consumers. Finally, it would hamstring aspects of the Commission's merger review process."

Consumer advocates and Democratic lawmakers had previously warned that the bill's vague wording could strip the FCC of powers to prevent egregious billing practices. But Wheeler's arguments go further, contending that the bill could hinder enforcement of even the most basic net neutrality rules.

Despite Wheeler's objections, the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved the bill on March 15.

In hearings before congressional committees, Wheeler offered to work with lawmakers on language of a bill that would prevent rate regulation without limiting the FCC's other powers. In one hearing last week, Wheeler explained why he thinks that rate-oversight authority comes into play with the bans on blocking and throttling. Consumers pay a rate for a service, and when there is blocking or throttling, the ISPs "are delivering less than the service [they] say [they] are going to offer. Therefore, there is a rate impact," Wheeler said.

In a recent interview with Ars, Wheeler explained that the commission's rate-oversight authority is necessary to ban paid prioritization "because paid is a rate." With paid prioritization, websites and online content providers would pay Internet service providers for priority network access.

The No Rate Regulation bill text says that "notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Federal Communications Commission may not regulate the rates charged for broadband Internet access service."

“This legislation leaves in place FCC authority to protect consumers from fraudulent actions, such as cramming and slamming, as well as breach of contract by carriers," Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) said after the March 15 vote on the bill. "Meanwhile, it gives certainty to innovators in the Internet marketplace so that they can continue to develop new services to save consumers money without having their creativity second guessed, after-the-fact by Washington bureaucrats.”

The bill would still need approval from the full House, Senate, and President Obama to become law, which is an unlikely prospect.