Overview
Title
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission relating to The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Prevention and Elimination of Digital Discrimination.
ELI5 AI
This bill is like Congress saying they don't like a new rule made by the people who manage phone and internet services. If passed, their rule would go away and not count anymore, but the bill doesn't tell us why Congress doesn't like it or what would happen next.
Summary AI
H. J. RES. 107 aims to express Congress's disapproval of a specific rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). This rule is related to the "Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act" and focuses on preventing and eliminating digital discrimination. If the joint resolution is passed, the FCC's rule would be nullified and have no legal effect.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Summary of the Bill
H. J. RES. 107 is a resolution expressing congressional disapproval of a rule set by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). This rule relates to preventing digital discrimination, as outlined in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. By passing this resolution, Congress aims to render the FCC's rule ineffective, meaning it will not be put into effect or enforced.
Significant Issues Highlighted
The bill raises several noteworthy issues. Firstly, it does not provide an explanation for why the congressional disapproval is being sought, leaving stakeholders and the public questioning the motivations behind this decision. This lack of transparency can hinder understanding and engagement.
Secondly, the bill references a specific Federal Register entry (89 Fed. Reg. 4128) without explaining what the rule entails. For those unfamiliar with the Federal Register, this omission could lead to confusion and limit informed debate on the subject matter. The lack of context makes it difficult for readers to grasp the rule's significance or implications.
Additionally, while the bill clearly states its intent to nullify the FCC's rule, it does not discuss the potential consequences or impacts of this action. The absence of detailed information about the implications of revoking the rule could lead to uncertainty about its effects on various communities and stakeholders.
Lastly, there is no assessment of how this disapproval might affect efforts to prevent and eliminate digital discrimination. The omission of such an evaluation could overlook the possible negative implications for anti-discrimination initiatives, affecting those working towards more equitable digital access.
Potential Impact on the Public
This bill, by nullifying an FCC rule, might impact the public in several ways. Generally, it could slow down or halt efforts aimed at addressing digital discrimination. If the FCC's rule was intended to create more equitable access to digital infrastructure, its nullification might perpetuate existing disparities in digital access—especially for underserved communities.
Those unaware of the context or content of the Federal Register might not fully understand the ramifications of this legislative action, leading to less informed discussions and decisions among the general public.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For stakeholders directly involved in digital infrastructure and anti-discrimination advocacy, the bill's lack of clarity poses challenges. Organizations and advocates working to ensure digital equity might view the disapproval as a setback, potentially stalling momentum in addressing digital discrimination issues.
Conversely, stakeholders who believe the FCC's rule was overreaching or unnecessary might view this bill positively, as it aligns with their perspective on reducing regulatory burdens. However, without additional context from the text, assessing the rule's broader implications and its subsequent disapproval remains difficult.
In conclusion, while H. J. RES. 107 directly targets a specific regulation, the absence of detailed rationale and context calls for more information to better understand the broader implications of this legislative move. Stakeholders are encouraged to seek additional resources and context to enrich their comprehension and engagement on the matter.
Issues
The bill expresses congressional disapproval of a specific rule by the Federal Communications Commission, but does not explain the rationale for this disapproval. This lack of explanation might obscure the motivations behind the legislative action, making it difficult for stakeholders and the general public to understand the underlying reasons for the bill. (Section: "The text disapproves a rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission without explaining the reasons behind this disapproval, which might make it difficult for stakeholders to understand the rationale.")
The bill references a specific Federal Register entry (89 Fed. Reg. 4128) without providing context or details about the rule it aims to nullify. This omission might lead to confusion or ambiguity for those not familiar with the Federal Register content, hindering informed discourse on the subject matter. (Section: "The section refers to a specific Federal Register entry (89 Fed. Reg. 4128) but does not provide additional context or explanation about what the rule entails, potentially leading to ambiguity for those unfamiliar with the content of the Federal Register.")
While the bill clearly states that the rule shall have no force or effect, it lacks detailed discussion about the specific implications or consequences of such revocation. Providing more information on the practical impacts of this legislative action would aid public understanding and evaluation of its broader effects. (Section: "The term 'such rule shall have no force or effect' is clear in intent but lacks detail regarding the specific implications or consequences of this revocation. Further explanation could enhance understanding.")
The bill does not assess or mention the potential impact on efforts to prevent and eliminate digital discrimination. This omission could be a significant concern for stakeholders who are evaluating the potential negative effects of dismissing this rule on ongoing or future anti-discrimination initiatives. (Section: "The text lacks any assessment or mention of the potential impact on digital discrimination prevention and elimination efforts, which could be a concern for those evaluating the broader effects of dismissing this rule.")
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress is expressing disapproval of a rule set by the Federal Communications Commission related to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act’s efforts to prevent digital discrimination, which means the rule will not be implemented.