(Reuters) — The U.S. Senate voted 52 to 47 on Wednesday to reverse the Federal Communications Commission decision in December to repeal landmark 2015 net neutrality rules, but it still faces an uphill battle. The margin was larger than expected with three Republicans voting with 47 Democrats and two independents to reverse the Trump administration action. Many politicians are convinced the issue will help motivate younger people to vote in the 2018 congressional elections and numerous polls show overwhelming public support. It is not clear if the U.S. House of Representatives will vote at all on the measure, while the White House has said it opposed repealing the December FCC order. Lets treat the internet like the public good that it is. We dont let water companies or phone companies discriminate against customers; we dont restrict access to interstate highways, saying you can ride on the highway, and you cant, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said. We shouldnt do that with the internet either. The FCC in December repealed rules set under Democratic President Barack Obama that barred internet service providers from blocking or slowing access to content or charging consumers more for certain content. The 2015 rules were intended to ensure a free and open internet, give consumers equal access to Web content and bar broadband service providers from favoring their own material or others. The new rules require internet providers to tell consumers whether they will block or slow content or offer paid fast lanes. Republicans say they back open internet principles and want Democrats to negotiate to enshrine net neutrality rules in law. Senator John Thune, who chairs the Commerce Committee, said the fact of the matter is nothing is going to change after the new rules take effect — and will not prod people to vote. I dont know how that animates people to vote if their Netflix is working, he told Reuters. The vote was a rare win for Democrats in the Republican-controlled Senate and a rebuke to regulators that approved a sweeping repeal of the Obama rules. Last week, the FCC said the net neutrality rules would expire on June 11 and that the new regulations approved in December, handing providers broad new power over how consumers can access the internet, would take effect. The revised rules were a win for internet service providers, whose practices faced significant government oversight and FCC investigations under the 2015 order. But the new rules are opposed by internet firms like Facebook and Alphabet. Comcast, Verizon Communications and AT&T have pledged to not block or discriminate against legal content after the net neutrality rules expire. A group of 22 states have sued the FCC over the repeal. AT&T said Wednesday it backs an open internet and actual bipartisan legislation that applies to all internet companies and guarantees neutrality, transparency, openness, non-discrimination and privacy protections for all internet users. The FCC decided in 2015 to reclassify internet service providers as common carriers under a 1996 law. But unlike how utilities are treated, the FCC decided not to impose rate regulations or require broadband providers to file notice of pricing plans.
Its unlikely the House will pass a similar vote. The Senate voted today on whether to reject the FCC decision to remove net neutrality protections -- and though it was unclear for some time whether the Democrats would gain enough Republican support to pass the measure, they did. Along with the 49 Senate Democrats, three Republican Senators -- Susan Collins (ME), John Kennedy (LA) and Lisa Murkowski (AK) -- voted to repeal the changes put into place by the FCC in December, resulting in a 52-47 tally. The new regulations are currently scheduled to go into effect June 11th. However, while this battle may have been won by those in support of net neutrality, there's still a long, hard road ahead, and the Senate measure isn't likely to survive. Going forward, a similar vote will have to pass in the House of Representatives. And though BattleForTheNet.com says the measure is currently backed by 161 Representatives, that's far from the 218 needed for it to pass. It's unlikely Democrats will be able to rally the kind of support they need in the House -- but even if they did, Donald Trump would still have to approve the measure. If such a resolution did make it through the House and ended up in front of the president, he's expected to overturn it with a veto. So while today feels like a win for net neutrality, it's probably the end of the road for this particular challenge to the FCC decision. "It's disappointing that Senate Democrats forced this resolution through by a narrow margin," FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said in a statement today. "But ultimately, I'm confident that their effort to reinstate heavy-handed government regulation of the internet will fail. " There are some other ongoing attempts to override the decision. A number of states including Montana, New York, New Jersey, Vermont, Hawaii and Oregon have implemented new rules requiring ISPs that provide service to state agencies to uphold net neutrality -- that means no blocking, throttling or paid prioritization. If providers do partake in those practices, they risk losing their government contracts. Dozens of states are also considering legislation that would reinstate net neutrality protections to some degree; in March, Washington passed a law protecting net neutrality in the state. " A person engaged in the provision of broadband internet access service in Washington state... may not: Block lawful content, applications, services or nonharmful devices, subject to network management; impair or degrade lawful internet traffic; engage in paid prioritization," said the bill. However, the FCC's decision says that states can't override its ruling, so it's unclear how long Washington's legislation will last before being challenged in court. USTelecom, a lobbying group that represents companies like AT&T and Verizon, said earlier this year that it would "aggressively challenge state or municipal attempts" to skirt the FCC decision. However, while many agree that banning state agencies from using ISPs that don't uphold net neutrality is a move that could withstand legal challenges, there's disagreement whether Washington's law and others like it would survive. Some have argued that the FCC doesn't actually have the authority to preempt state laws in this case. Also joining the fight are 22 states' and Washington DC's attorneys general who have filed a lawsuit challenging the FCC order calling it "arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act." Eleven other entities, including tech companies, rights groups and county governments, also filed lawsuits against the FCC, all of which were combined with that of the attorneys general in March. On the other side, three trade groups that represent nearly all major ISPs in the US signed on to back the FCC in the case. There are also two bills in both the Senate and the House that are masquerading as net neutrality protections, but neither do much more than what the FCC's ruling put into place. Much of the FCC's changes would remain -- including Title I classification and paid prioritization -- though the bills would ban blocking and throttling. Neither are expected to gain much traction. Whether the House measure does or doesn't pass, the attempt alone will likely become a major talking point for Congressional Democrats as we gear up for midterm elections -- those who continued to support net neutrality are sure to point that out as election battles heat up. And lines are already being drawn in the sand. " Soon, the American people will know which side their member of Congress is on -- fighting for big corporations and ISPs or defending small business owners, entrepreneurs, middle-class families and everyday consumers," Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said in a statement last month. Net neutrality has a long, difficult road ahead and it certainly faces an uphill battle in the House. But some remain optimistic that enough public support could urge leaders to vote in its favor. Representative Mike Doyle, a co-sponsor of the House effort, said last month, "I think grassroots pressure on Congress to support this bill will continue to grow until the public gets what it wants -- an end to special interest efforts to kill net neutrality. " If you're interested in letting your representatives know how you feel about net neutrality, you can see which leaders are currently in support of or against Congressional efforts to overturn the FCC decision here. The website will also connect you to those representatives' Twitter accounts and offices. GBlakeley via Getty Images (Capitol Building), Patrick Gorski/NurPhoto via Getty Images (protesters) and Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call (Chuck Schumer)