Need for Regulated interconnection in IP world debated in responses to house CommAct Update White Paper

Any update of the Act should vest the FCC "and states where appropriate ... [with] the general authority to oversee entities engaged in interconnection of communications networks," the American Cable Association said, adding that regulators "should, where there are demonstrable public and national interests, have the authority to require interconnection at reasonable rates, on not unreasonable, non-discriminatory terms and conditions, and at technically feasible points. Finally, where these interests no longer require government intervention, regulatory relief should be provided. In general, ACA submits that the Communications Act, as amended, contains in sections 201 and 251 a reasonable regulatory structure for interconnection, and any amendments to the Act should build upon the requirements in these provisions even as technologies evolve and market dynamics change." CTIA called for a "uniform regulatory regime for interconnection" with interconnection agreements "governed principally by contract negotiations among providers, with an appropriate regulatory backstop that includes firm timelines for resolving disputes." It added that any update of the Act should "[p]romote interconnection policies that are technologically neutral." CTIA said it would prefer a "federal mechanism" for the "regulatory backstop" in the event of unresolved disputes over interconnection to the state-focused mechanism in section 252 of the Act. It said that "Congress should consider all options and identify the most effective forum and means for resolving disputes. Regardless of where and how the dispute resolution backstop operates, Congress should ensure that it is subject to firm timelines and provides the necessary authority to resolve disputes in a timely manner." As for the committee's query as to whether best-efforts services and managed services should be treated differently, ITTA said that Congress should "let the marketplace function freely and avoid adopting rules that would impose different regulatory requirements on "managed" and "best efforts" services in the absence of firm evidence of market failures. Unnecessarily adding additional layers of regulation on different types of services will only lead to higher prices and fewer providers wanting to offer those services."