IP-Enabled Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 2005
Latest action. Placed on Senate legislative calendarThe list of measures reported out of committee and eligible for floor action. Being on the calendar is not a promise of a vote.Read the full definition (opens a new tab) under General Orders. Calendar No. 353.
IP-Enabled Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 2005 - Directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to review requirements outlined in a specified FCC report and order and, within 120 days after enactment of this Act, establish requirements that are technologically and operationally feasible for providers of IP-enabled voice service to ensure that 911 and E (enhanced)-911 services are available to subscribers of IP-enabled voice services. Requires the FCC to issue regulations regarding access to 911 components by IP-enabled voice service providers. Defines "IP-enabled voice service" as certain real-time two-way voice communications offered, or effectively available, to the public, transmitted using TCP/IP or a successor protocol, for a fee and with two-way interconnection capability such that the service can originate traffic to, and terminate traffic from, the public switched telephone network.
Allows a provider of IP-enabled voice service to continue to provide non-911 or E-911 service to subscribers who had subscribed as of December 31, 2005, and to whom notice has been given of the unavailability of such service. Requires such a provider, each six months, to file a report with the FCC detailing its efforts to identify and implement a 911 or E-911 solution, or both.
Allows the FCC to waive its 911 or E-911 service requirements if: (1) the provider gives to subscribers separate and clear notice that it does not offer such service to its customers; (2) the subscriber separately acknowledges receipt of such notice in writing or by electronic means; and (3) the provider demonstrates that it is not technologically or operationally feasible to comply with the 911 or E-911 requirements. Limits: (1) each waiver to a 12-month period; and (2) the waiver authority period to 48 months after the enactment of this Act.
Provides for parity of protection with respect to immunity and other protection from liability under federal and state law for a provider or user of IP-enabled voice services, a public safety answering point (PSAP), and the officers, employees and authorizing government entity, if any, of such provider, user, or PSAP.
The summary continues for 3 more paragraphs. Read it in full on Congress.gov
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Reported to Senate with amendment(s)" stage on December 20, 2005. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on December 20, 2005: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 353.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the Senate
- Passage by the House
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 109th Congress (2005-06), 482 of the 10,701 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 4.5 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
CLARENCE NELSON (D-FL) introduced it on May 18, 2005, and 4 members have since signed on as cosponsors.
They come from both major parties: 2 Democrats, 2 Republicans.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on May 18, 2005, 7785 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 7569 days ago, on December 20, 2005.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 109th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2007 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- SenateIn committee, no floor vote yet
- HouseAwaits Senate passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers