Passed
386 Yea7 Nay38 Not voting2/3 required
HR-5200-119
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 375.
Sponsored by Doris Matsui (D-CA)
What it does
This bill would require the FCC to hold public hearings and issue reports after significant activations of its Disaster Information Reporting System, covering outage duration, affected users, and effects on 911 emergency call centers. It would also require the FCC to study and report on whether outage notifications to emergency call centers should include visual information, and whether current outage reporting thresholds miss significant 911 outages. The bill explicitly does not expand FCC authority over broadband providers beyond what is specified.
Who benefits
Emergency communications centers, 911 directors, and first responders who would gain more systematic data on network outages during disasters; residents of disaster-affected areas who could benefit from improved network resiliency recommendations; state, local, and tribal emergency management officials who would gain a formal role in FCC hearings; researchers and policymakers studying disaster communications.
Who is hurt
Communications service providers (broadband, VoIP, mobile carriers) who would bear administrative burdens from participating in hearings and providing information, and who may face pressure to adopt new visual-notification technology; the FCC, which would take on additional reporting and hearing obligations without additional funding specified in the bill. No group faces substantial financial or rights-based harm.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that during major disasters like hurricanes, wildfires, and earthquakes, network outages can cripple 911 systems when people need help most, and that systematic public reporting would help identify weaknesses and drive resiliency improvements. They contend that involving local officials, first responders, and affected residents in hearings ensures the FCC's recommendations reflect real-world experience rather than only industry data, citing past disasters where communication failures delayed emergency response.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the bill creates new bureaucratic reporting and hearing requirements without dedicated funding, potentially straining FCC resources and delaying actionable improvements behind procedural hurdles. They contend that studying whether to require visual outage information, rather than mandating it directly, may result in years of delay before public safety agencies see any practical benefit, and that outage data collection could burden smaller carriers disproportionately.
Constitutional context
Congress has authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate interstate communications infrastructure, and the bill operates within the FCC's existing statutory authority under the Communications Act of 1934. The bill explicitly disclaims any expansion of FCC authority over broadband providers, limiting constitutional exposure and avoiding the major questions doctrine concerns raised in cases like West Virginia v. EPA.
Checks and balances
Congress directs the FCC (an executive branch independent agency) to conduct hearings, collect data, and issue reports, but the bill's rule of construction limits any expansion of the FCC's regulatory authority, and Congress retains oversight through its power to further legislate based on the reports.
Historical precedent
The FCC has long required outage reporting under existing rules (e.g., Network Outage Reporting System), and this bill builds on that existing framework rather than creating an entirely new precedent.
Passed