Pennsylvania House Bill HB924

Pennsylvania 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/17/25
• Refer: 3/17/25

Caption

In general provisions relating to Public Utility Code, further providing for definitions; and providing for Internet neutrality.

Summary

HB924 would add a new Internet neutrality chapter to Pennsylvania’s Public Utility Code and expand the statutory definition of “public utility” to include entities providing Internet access through equipment located in the Commonwealth. The bill defines key terms such as broadband Internet access service, edge provider, Internet service provider, and paid prioritization, and then imposes net-neutrality-style obligations on broadband providers operating in Pennsylvania. Under the bill, Internet service providers could not block lawful content, applications, services, or nonharmful devices; impair or degrade lawful traffic; engage in paid prioritization; unreasonably interfere with customers’ access choices or edge providers’ ability to reach customers; use deceptive marketing about traffic treatment; or sell broadband service without clearly disclosing all material aspects of the service. The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission would be authorized to adopt rules to administer and enforce the chapter, and violations would also be treated as unfair or deceptive acts under the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law.

Impact

HB924 would create a new state-level regulatory framework for broadband providers and Internet traffic management, bringing Internet service providers within the Public Utility Code and subjecting them to PUC oversight. It would also make violations enforceable as consumer protection violations and bar Commonwealth agencies from contracting with providers found to have violated the chapter, affecting both private broadband providers and state procurement practices.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no documented debate or recorded sentiment from hearings or floor action. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to reflect a pro-consumer, pro-open-internet policy approach, but the legislative record provided does not show whether that view was broadly shared or opposed.

Contention

The main likely points of contention are the scope of state regulation over broadband providers, whether the PUC should have authority to police Internet traffic management, and how the bill’s restrictions would interact with network management practices and provider business models. Another likely issue is the procurement penalty for Commonwealth agencies, which could be seen as a strong enforcement tool but also as a potential limitation on state contracting flexibility. No specific objections or supporters are identified in the provided materials.