Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., has included net neutrality among his Senate campaign priorities, featured prominently on his campaign homepage. He is running for re-election this November, a seat the nonpartisan Rothenberg Political Report deems safely Democratic. Net neutrality has featured in other Senate campaigns, such as that of Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn. (CD June 4 p5 ). Booker’s campaign website highlights net neutrality in two separate pages, one allowing people to “tell the FCC: No Internet ‘fast lanes.'” The website argued the FCC has changed its policies: “In the past, the FCC has agreed that Internet ‘fast lanes’ like those currently under consideration would threaten net neutrality,” the Booker campaign website said in a sample letter to the agency (http://bit.ly/1jujvIc). “This proposed rule change would likely result in higher consumer costs and decreased private sector innovation.” The FCC has defended its net neutrality rulemaking as merely asking questions and disputed assertions it’s pushing to allow for any such Internet fast lanes. Another Booker campaign webpage asked for voter feedback on the issue. “Do you agree with the principles of Net Neutrality?” the Booker campaign asked, allowing people to select yes or no (http://bit.ly/T1ns0l). “Are you a small business owner who relies on Net Neutrality?”

Comments began coming in to Congress Friday on competition policy. House Republicans asked stakeholders to weigh in by that deadline, in a white paper issued last month as part of their effort to overhaul the Communications Act. The committee hasn’t publicly released any comments, but some stakeholders made theirs available. Competition “should be based on the existence of market power, not tied to the use of a particular technology, protocol, business model, or class of service provider,” Sprint told Congress. One key principle is “nondiscriminatory interconnection and access to bottleneck facilities at just and reasonable rates, terms and conditions,” Sprint said. “The current regulatory paradigm” of the act “has significant value” for small- to mid-sized cable companies, despite regular review and revision required of the 1992 Cable Act, said the American Cable Association. “The Commission needs to consider the aggregate effect of its regulations, which can inhibit competition, on small firms.” ACA warned against reclassifying broadband as a Title II telecom service and the uncertainty that would cause. Broadband for America also slammed that possibility and warned against regulations designed for monopoly (http://bit.ly/1qc4hiC). The Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance urged Congress to be careful in considering what competition really is, suggesting it shouldn’t be based on number of service providers alone. Take into account level and quality of service, it recommended. The FCC needs to account for “facilities-based, cross-platform intermodal competition, enabled by the rise of digital and Internet Protocol-based services,” said the Free State Foundation (http://bit.ly/1sciwFW), calling for the end of the “indeterminate” public interest standard. There should be “carefully delineated authority to address interconnection practices that might pose significant consumer harm if the agency finds that marketplace competition is not adequately protecting consumers,” Free State said of a potential exception.

CEA hailed Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., for introducing the Wireless Innovation Act (http://1.usa.gov/1p1SEa4) as a “forward-looking approach” that will help ensure “our commercial spectrum supply can meet consumer demand.” S-2473 would reallocate 200 MHz of government spectrum for commercial use (CD June 12 p15). “Federal regulation and policies governing the allocation of spectrum must reflect our current, widespread use of this invaluable resource,” said CEA President Gary Shapiro in a news release Thursday (http://bit.ly/1vazLFQ). “By reallocating government spectrum for commercial use, establishing an auction pipeline with deadlines and incentivizing federal agencies to reallocate spectrum, this legislation works to advance a 21st-century spectrum policy that helps us find new ways to meet our ever-growing demand for wireless access.” CTIA and PCIA are among other groups that also have hailed the bill’s introduction.

The House Judiciary Antirust Subcommittee plans a net neutrality hearing Friday at 9 a.m. in 2141 Rayburn, as expected (CD June 11 p16), said the committee in a news release. It said Friday that witnesses will include Robert McDowell, a former Republican FCC commissioner and now visiting fellow with the Hudson Institute; Bruce Owen, a senior fellow with the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research; FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright; and Tim Wu, a professor at Columbia Law School.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., filed cloture Thursday on the motion to proceed to consider the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2015 (HR-4660). That House version of the legislation became embroiled in various debates over Internet governance and reduced funding to NTIA, given concerns from House Republicans (CD June 2 p8). The item is expected to be considered this week, with the Senate back in session Monday.

The Competitive Carriers Association late Wednesday praised Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., for laying out plans earlier in the day for spectrum legislation (CD June 12 p15). “I completely agree that we must find ways to free up as much spectrum as possible by working collaboratively with federal users to support competitive carriers, and we must maximize the use of this limited resource,” CCA President Steve Berry said. “Having a pipeline of future spectrum auctions will only help open up secondary markets for competitive carriers and will provide additional opportunities for carriers to gain access to this much needed resource.” CTIA and PCIA also backed Rubio’s agenda.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Mich., said Thursday he’s “extremely optimistic” that the Senate will pass its own long-delayed version of cybersecurity information sharing legislation this year. The Senate Intelligence Committee is now finalizing its information sharing bill, named in a discussion draft as the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act, which tracks with many aspects of the House-passed Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (HR-624). Rogers said at an American Enterprise Institute event that he met with Senate Intelligence leaders Wednesday. “That was one of the most productive meetings I thought we had this year on this issue,” he said. “I am very, very encouraged by this meeting yesterday.” Former NSA Director Keith Alexander said Congress needs to pass cybersecurity legislation that improves information sharing between the government and private sector. That legislation should also include liability protections for companies acting on government-supplied information, Alexander said. “We need to push that through,” he said.

The Senate Judiciary and Intelligence committee heads discussed on Thursday cooperating on a single surveillance overhaul bill, speaking at an executive session of the Judiciary Committee. The Senate has been considering HR-3361, the modified USA Freedom Act, which the House passed earlier this year. Senate Intelligence leadership is open to trying “to work from the House bill,” said Intelligence Chairman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a member of Judiciary. Intelligence ranking member Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., has “concerns” with the USA Freedom Act, but “I think we can take care of them,” Feinstein said. Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who sponsored the original USA Freedom Act in the Senate, said there are “some problems” with the House-passed version of the legislation but he’s “committed to moving forward with surveillance reform legislation in the Senate,” he said. The bill would have to “effectively” ban bulk collection of metadata, he said. Feinstein outlined a need to work closely with Leahy, with one surveillance bill on the floor rather than two. Feinstein noted the significance of moving metadata storage away from the government and to companies, a system in which the “telecoms would receive immunity.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee will mark up S-2454, the Satellite Television Access Reauthorization Act of 2014, next Thursday at 9:30 a.m. in 226 Dirksen. Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and ranking member Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, introduced the clean, two-page STELA bill on Tuesday. It’s the only piece of legislation Judiciary will consider at this executive business meeting, alongside several nominations.

The Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee scheduled its expected oversight hearing on AT&T’s proposed DirecTV purchase for June 24, it said in a notice Thursday. It will be at 2:30 p.m. in 226 Dirksen. The House Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee plans its oversight hearing on the deal the morning of that same day, with AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson and DirecTV CEO Michael White to testify at that first hearing. Witnesses weren’t announced for the Senate hearing.