House Democrats Fear 'Wrong Path' of GOP FCC Transparency Proposals

“We’ve got the markup Wednesday on those transparency bills and now we’ve got some bipartisan bills,” Walden told us. “We’ve got some Democrats that are coming forward with their ideas, too, and I think that’s important. There have been some reforms each FCC chair has had but none of them are locked in statute, and the next chairman can undo them. And you still have all these issues with public access to the documents and to the proposed rules, things of that nature. I think they could be strengthened by being more transparent. And I would hope [Wheeler would] be more receptive to what we’re trying to do.”

Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., is also eyeing the markup and considered that it may improve the relationship between lawmakers and the FCC. “We’re moving some legislation that’s going to require more transparency and make things a little better, so we’ll see how it goes,” Upton remarked.

Walden considers this markup part of a broader FCC reauthorization process pegged to a piecemeal overhaul of the Communications Act that he and other Republicans are leading. Walden has said this step represents the subcommittee’s look at Communications Act Title I, dealing with FCC operations, and that they will proceed title by title (see 1504290037). Although Walden stressed the bipartisan nature of the markup, senior Democrats have cautioned that they are not privy to any higher-level strategic planning in any telecom rewrite, inspiring some industry doubts about the initiative (see 1505140064).

Democrats still object to the GOP proposals. “The majority drafts would not remedy administrative and procedural problems perceived and articulated by the majority,” a Democratic staff memo from House Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said Tuesday. “Although Democrats were able to negotiate changes to the FCC Process Reform Act last Congress to mitigate some of these concerns, the new Republican proposals head back down the wrong path.” The Democratic staff cited potential “delay and confusion” for stakeholders regulated by the FCC. “Although purported to help increase transparency at the FCC, the practical impact of the drafts would result in delays, uncertainty, and confusion,” the memo said of the GOP draft bills. The memo dubbed the Democratic proposals “a true alternative.”

Walden “seems to have found some low-hanging fruit with the various transparency proposals that are being marked up tomorrow, but I don't know where he goes from there,” New America Foundation Open Technology Institute Policy Counsel Josh Stager said of the Communications Acts overhaul. “I've been dubious about the prospects for a meaningful rewrite, comprehensive or otherwise, since last year. Nothing in these first months of the 114th Congress suggests this is going anywhere soon -- and it's only going to get more difficult to thread this needle the closer we get to 2016.”

Stager is also unsure what Walden “means when he talks about an update that goes ‘title by title,’ or how such an approach would work,” he added. “If there's precedent for such a legislative approach, I'm not aware of it.” House Republicans have said the examination of the various titles won't necessarily be consecutive.

Republicans frame the concerns about FCC process as bipartisan: “Members on both sides of the aisle have questioned lapses in process, such as unexplained delays in disposition of matters, unequal access to information, unusual procedures, and the exercise of discretion on the part of FCC Chairmen,” the GOP memo said. “While the FCC has sought to reform itself, Congressional action is the appropriate solution for establishing reasonable parameters to ensure a transparent process.” The markup will be at 2 p.m. in 2123 Rayburn.