WASHINGTON — With control of the Senate possibly passing to the Democrats and the House perhaps losing a dozen to two dozen seats, there could be some big changes in the principal Federal Communications Commission oversight committees.

After the Nov. 8 election, the second campaign season gets in gear as legislators angle for those plum posts in a new Congress.

Even though the House is unlikely to change hands — Republicans have the biggest majority (59 seats) in almost 100 years — most of the potential post-election action in the lame-duck Congress on the communications oversight front is in that chamber.

House Energy & Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton (D-Mich.) and Communications Subcommittee chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) are term-limited and will have to give up their respective seats. Walden is looking to take over Upton’s chair, but has competition from John Shimkus (R-Ill.), who has seniority.

Walden is well-liked and, as head of the National Republican Congressional Committee, raises money and strategizes to help elect and re-elect Republicans to Congress. There were differing opinions on that race from sources both on and off the Hill, who asked not to be identified. One source believed seniority would win out and Shimkus would get the big chair. But another said Walden’s fundraising counted for a lot and predicted he would get the full committee chairmanship.

While Republicans will almost certainly lose seats, Walden reportedly has been advising them to run local races for a year now, a wise strategy given the questionable coattails of the eventual Republican presidential nominee.

If Walden does not get it, there might be a way for him to remain atop Communications despite his term limits. There have been talks about moving oversight of the Federal Trade Commission from the Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade Subcommittee to Communications, which would reconstitute Communications and allow Walden to chair that newly reconstituted committee.

That would make sense now that the FCC and FTC are having to team on overseeing online privacy.

If the FTC move doesn’t happen, vice chair Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) would be in line for the chairmanship of the Communications Subcommittee given that she is currently vice chair.

It took the full House Commerce Committee barely eight minutes to approve by voice vote the Domain Openness Through Continued Oversight Matters(DotCom) Act Wednesday morning (June 17). In opening the brief mark-up session, committee chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) described adoption of the law as "the next step in [the Internet's] evolution" and urged that "we must do so with an eye toward preserving the Internet’s vitality and character."

The bill (H.R. 805) requires certifications and an opportunity for congressional review to ensure that any transfer of U.S. involvement over the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) does not enable other countries to grab greater control over critical Internet functions. A draft of the proposed law had breezed through the Telecommunications Subcommitteelast week with bipartisan support.

The only kurfuffle in today's discussion came from Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), who asked that in the final draft of the bill, the term "adopted" is used. He pointed out that Lawrence Strickling, head of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, has urged that the legislation use the term "adopted" rather than "implemented" to describe Congress's role in future international agreements. Shimkus, in what he called "out of fun," noted that Strickling's message to the committee actually used the word "implemented" (or a variation) at least three times. Multichannel News's requests to NTIA to obtain a copy of Strickling's message were not returned.

Shimkus said he "only hopes that NTIA also changes the word."

Last week, Senate Commerce Committee chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) and three other senators introduced a companion DotCom bill, S.1551, identical to the House version. There is no timetable for senate review of the plan. Cosponsors of the senate version are subcommittee ranking member Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) and subcommittee chairmen Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.).

Throughout Wednesday's cordial House hearing there were repeated calls for bipartisan support as the bill works its way through Congress.

Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), who shepherded the legislation as chairman of theSubcommittee on Communications and Technology, emphasized the need for "oversight of the process of transitioning the IANA functions away from the United States to the international multi-stakeholder community" and for "effective safeguards ... [to] preserve the Internet we have come to rely on in so many aspects of our lives."

Walden reminded his colleagues that the "NTIA set forward strong criteria necessary for any successful transition proposal, including a requirement that ICANN improve its accountability to the Internet community."

"Through this bill, we can achieve our shared goal: preventing harm to the Internet as we know it," Walden added.

Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the Communications Subcommittee, who had pushed for bipartisan support, was enthusiastic as the vote came.

"This isa good bill," she said.  "It is a very important bill relative to the position of the United States (regarding) the Internet."

In prepared remarks, Eshoo explained, "The bill represents a sensible solution to ensure that the IANA transition supports and enhances the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance; maintains the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet domain name system; and does not replace the role of the NTIA with a government-led or intergovernmental organization solution."

In his overview, chairman Upton reminded his colleagues that when it comes to "removing the U.S. government from its oversight of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority – we must look before we leap."

Upton also observed that, "The legislation ... ensures that accountability measures have been put in place so that the Internet community can take action should ICANN stray from its path."

The House Energy & Commerce Committee has voted generally along party lines --with one exception-- to grant chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) subpoena power without having to get the approval of the minority or, failing that, a vote of the entire committee.

That means the chair can compel testimony and witnesses in its oversight of various agencies, including the FCC. The committee plans to focus some attention this session on FCC process, including how it makes regulatory decisions, and efforts to restore network neutrality rules, according to the committee majority's oversight plan.

The committee held its first meeting in the new Congress, an organizational meeting to vote on the rules, and which was billed by in advance as pretty much a pro forma exercise. Some legislators were certainly exercised over the Republican proposal. That subpoena power change--adopted 28 to 23--highlighted a contentious start that belied the evocations at the beginning of the meeting of the general bipartisan nature of the committee. The vote was purely along party lines except for chairman emeritus Joe Barton (R-Tex.), who voted against the move, and after some harsh words from Democrats.

Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) called it a cheap power grab, and ranking member Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) called it a terrible precedent for potential abuse of power, saying it was a "huge mistake" that moved the committee in the wrong direction.

Rep. Anna Eshoo 9D-Calif.) said it Upton had a record of thoughtful policy decisions and suggested this did not fit that mold. She said it was not like him to "come out of the box this way," with a rule change that "casts aside" the bipartisan partnership Upton has talked about.

She said undermining that "advise and consent" role was not good government.

Upton pointed out that six other committees in the last Congress had given their chairman the power, that he would use it only as a last resort, and that it would enhance the committee's investigative capabilities. He said it would allow the committee to act quickly to "leverage" cooperation. He said there would be no change in the bipartisan nature of investigations and the committee would attempt to get voluntary cooperation wherever possible and consult with minority "where practicable."

The committee rules in the last Congress required the chairman to consult with the ranking member, and if they could not agree, to call for a vote of the committee before issuing a subpoena.

The new rules would not require that, but it would require that the chairman notify the minority and, "where practicable," 72 hours before issuing the subpoena. Ranking member Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) said that "where practicable" was a loophole he wanted closed, but the language stayed in the rules as voted.

The Democrats said the change made them feel marginalized, and while they did not expect Upton to abuse the privilege, they were worried about the precedent it set. They also asked what problem needed fixing, given that there no examples in the last Congress of subpoenas the chairman wanted that did not get issued, and that if the chair and the ranking member could not agree, the majority had enough votes to approve a subpoena.

They also said that it was no argument for the rules that other committees did it, and they would rather have other committees emulating the comity of E&C.

They all said they did not think Upton would misuse his power, but that giving the chair, any chair, the unchecked authority to issue subpoenas was a bad precedent and an un-bipartisan way to kick off the new committee.