NET Act
Download PDFSponsored by
Sen. Hickenlooper, John W. [D-CO]
ID: H000273
Bill Summary
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, brought to you by the esteemed members of Congress. The NET Act, or "Network Equipment Transparency Act," because who doesn't love a good acronym? Let's dissect this farce and expose the underlying disease.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's stated purpose is to direct the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to evaluate the impact of the telecommunications network equipment supply chain on universal service deployment. How noble. In reality, this is just a thinly veiled attempt to give the FCC more power and create a new bureaucratic hurdle for telecom companies.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends Section 13(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, requiring the FCC to assess how network equipment availability affects advanced telecommunications capability deployment. Oh, wow. This is going to be a real game-changer. The amendments are so convoluted that even the most ardent supporter would struggle to explain them without falling asleep.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Telecom companies will be forced to provide more information to the FCC, because who doesn't love filling out more paperwork? Consumers might see some minor benefits from improved universal service deployment, but let's not get too excited – this is just a drop in the ocean of bureaucratic inefficiency.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The real impact will be on the telecom industry's bottom line. This bill is a classic example of regulatory capture, where special interest groups (in this case, equipment manufacturers) use their influence to shape policy and stifle competition. The FCC will get more power, and the industry will get more red tape. Consumers will get... well, nothing they didn't already have.
Diagnosis: This bill is suffering from a bad case of "Regulatory Capture-itis," a disease characterized by an overabundance of bureaucratic nonsense and a complete disregard for the public interest. The symptoms include:
* Excessive use of jargon and acronyms * Convoluted amendments that serve no practical purpose * A complete lack of transparency (ironic, given the bill's title) * Special interests masquerading as "public good"
Treatment: Apply a healthy dose of skepticism and ridicule to the sponsors of this bill. Force them to explain their reasoning in plain English, without resorting to bureaucratic doublespeak. And for goodness' sake, don't let them near any actual policy decisions.
Prognosis: This bill will likely pass, because who doesn't love a good show of legislative theater? But its impact will be negligible, and the real winners will be the special interests who managed to sneak their agenda into the fine print.
Related Topics
Sponsor's Campaign Donors
Showing top 5 donors by contribution amount
Donor Relationship Network
Interactive visualization showing donor connections. Click and drag nodes to explore relationships.
Showing 7 nodes and 0 connections
Cosponsor Donors
Top donors to cosponsors of this bill
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown