The Barton Bill (more precisely, the Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act, sponsored by Rep. Joe Barton [R-Texas]) passed the House yesterday, 321 to 101. It grants RBOCs national franchises to offer video services. A network neutrality amendment offered by Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) failed 152 to 269, although there are still net neutrality provisions in the legislation. For Cable, the Barton Bill is a mixed bag. As we’ve maintained all along, competition should be on a level playing field where providers are treated fairly, and the Barton Bill language is fairer than previous versions and would seem to encourage a field where all players are following the same rules at the same time. However, the net neutrality language in the current draft Senate bill sponsored by Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) takes more of a wait-and-see approach on regulating the Internet than the Barton Bill, directing the FCC to watch for problems and inform Congress if serious problems arise. Net neutrality means different things to different people, making it a problematic issue to regulate, and we believe that the current language in the Stevens bill strikes the right balance. Hearings on the Senate bill are expected to start as early as next week.

Here's the response to the Barton Bill from Kyle McSlarrow, President & CEO of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association.