Summary of the Bill

This joint resolution, introduced as H. J. RES. 153 in the 118th Congress, aims to express Congressional disapproval of a rule put forward by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The rule in question relates to "Safeguarding and Securing the Open Internet; Restoring Internet Freedom" and was recorded in the Federal Register on May 22, 2024. The essence of the resolution is to officially state that Congress does not support this FCC rule, thereby ensuring it will not be implemented or enforced.

Significant Issues

The resolution presents notable issues primarily rooted in its brevity and lack of explanatory content. Firstly, it disapproves of the FCC's rule without providing any rationale. This absence of explanation raises concerns about transparency and accountability, causing stakeholders to question the motivations and reasoning behind this disapproval. Without context or reasoning, the public and other interested parties might find it challenging to understand what prompted Congress to take this stance.

Furthermore, the formal and concise language of the resolution, typical of legislative documents, might not be easily accessible to those unfamiliar with legal terminology. This can hinder broader public engagement and understanding, as the average citizen may struggle to parse its implications.

Finally, the resolution simply negates the rule without addressing its consequences or suggesting alternative paths. Such an action could be seen as a lack of due diligence, raising concerns that potential impacts, whether positive or negative, have not been thoroughly considered.

Potential Impact on the Public

Broadly, the public might experience mixed impacts from the disapproval of this FCC rule. On one hand, some may welcome Congress's decision, especially if they oppose the changes the FCC rule aimed to enact. These individuals might argue that such a stance helps protect the principles of open internet access.

On the other hand, the disapproval could be viewed negatively by those who favored the FCC's approach to safeguarding the open internet and restoring internet freedom. For these stakeholders, the decision could represent a missed opportunity to address internet governance issues they care about deeply.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Internet service providers (ISPs), regulatory bodies, advocacy groups, and everyday internet users are among the stakeholders likely to be affected.

• Internet Service Providers (ISPs): They might benefit if the disapproved rule imposed additional regulatory constraints. However, if the rule aimed to protect net neutrality principles, the disapproval could mean ISPs retain greater control over their internet practices, potentially leading to less consumer protection.

• Regulatory Bodies: The absence of implementation means the FCC's intended approach to internet governance will not take effect, potentially impacting their regulatory objectives and agenda.

• Advocacy Groups: Especially those committed to net neutrality, these groups might view the development as detrimental, as it denies what they perceive as necessary protections for maintaining an open internet.

• Everyday Internet Users: The long-term impact on users depends largely on the content of the FCC's rule. If the rule aimed to strengthen internet freedom and access, users might face challenges due to its disapproval. Conversely, if it imposed restrictive regulations, users might enjoy greater flexibility and access options.

Overall, while the resolution reflects a clear governmental stance, the lack of detail on its implications and rationale leaves significant ambiguity regarding the broader impact on society and specific groups within it.