Lobbying

3:04 p.m. December 20, 2017: “This just came out,” said President Donald Trump. “Two minutes ago, they handed it to me. AT&T plans to increase U.S. capital spending [by] $1 billion and provide [a] $1,000 special bonus to more than 200,000 U.S. employees, and that’s because of what we did. So that’s pretty good. That’s pretty good.” The Republican lawmakers surrounding the president applauded. The moment represented a big win for AT&T, which Trump's Justice Department is suing to block an $85 billion acquisition of Time Warner.

Even if the Federal Communications Commission wins in court, large Internet serivce providers still need to find a way to prevent any future FCCs from simply reinstating the network neutrality rules. That’s why the same giant ISPs that backed the FCC’s assault on net neutrality are now pushing for a “legislative solution” in Congress. The goal: they want a law that contains so many loopholes as to be effectively meaningless, yet prevents the FCC from crafting any real, tough laws down the road.

[Commentary] When the Federal Communications Commission voted December 14 to repeal the rules protecting a fast, fair, and open internet, the lobbyists for the internet service providers realized their long-envisioned strategy to gut the authority of the agency that since 1934 has been charged with overseeing the activities of the nation’s essential networks. The companies’ goal: to move regulatory jurisdiction from the Federal Communications Commission to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

Three of the largest internet service providers and their trade association have spent at least $26.3 million on lobbying the federal government since April 1 -- about $1.12 for every public comment filed with the government on a repeal of net neutrality rules. The battle over net neutrality shapes up as another defeat for Americans, who have been outmuscled by corporate money in the nation's capital on issues ranging from climate change to Ajit Pai, the former Verizon lawyer-turned-FCC head, announced that the commission would vote on a proposal to eliminate net neutrality on Dec 14.

[Commentary] If you’re scared of a future America without network neutrality, I want to terrify you. The potential repeal of what should be a civic right should chill you to the bone. After spending twelve years running a company that helps millions of people to break through the barriers of censorship imposed by oppressive governments, I am quite familiar with the ramifications of such repressions.

While it is clear that alignment with the Internet service providers is currently drawn along party lines, the industry’s attempt to gain favor with lawmakers is not partisan. Entrenched telecommunications companies liberally spread money and attention to everyone who holds office. Sometimes that influence comes in the form of lavish parties with Olympic athletes and lobbyists, but consistently it comes in the form of contributions to campaigns.

Facebook hired the former top aide to a lawmaker investigating how Russians may have used its platform to subvert the 2016 election to lobby on its behalf in Oct. Facebook is bolstering its forces in Washington amid unprecedented investigations into the power of its platform and a new bill that would create new disclosure requirements for online political ads. Facebook hired Luke Albee to lobby on, among other issues, "election integrity," per the form.

AT&T is promising to spend an additional billion dollars in 2018 if Congress slashes its tax bill for the next 10 years or more, and the company isn’t making any promises beyond that. This extra billion in investment would cost the rest of us at least $50 billion over the next decade. That’s a literal steal for AT&T and its shareholders. Put another way: For the $50 billion this corporate tax break would cost us for AT&T alone, the government could pay to have fiber-to-the-home built to every single AT&T-covered household that doesn’t yet have it.

Google’s parent company, Alphabet, made a big bet on Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election. Employees donated $1.6 million to her campaign, about 80% more than the amount given by workers at any other corporation, and Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt helped set up companies to analyze political data for the campaign. Schmidt even wore a badge labeled “STAFF” at Mrs. Clinton’s election-night bash. His support of the losing side didn’t go unnoticed among the victors.

As the probes of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election turn to the role of social-media giants, Facebook is looking to boost its influence in Washington amid talk of potential federal regulation. The Menlo Park (CA) company has invested more than $8.4 million this year on its 36-member federal lobbying team—putting it on track to spend more on federal lobbying than in any previous year.

The company recently added Republican-led Hamilton Place Strategies and other communications strategists to its team and posted an ad seeking a crisis communications specialist. The tech giant also held several focus-group sessions last week hosted by Quadrant Strategies, a Democratic-led research firm. People familiar with the sessions said public relations professionals and other Washington insiders were among the attendees. Facebook was soliciting advice as to how best to respond to the Russia ad controversy—and how to communicate with Republicans in particular, apparently.