Despite some progress in a decade-old fight over the FCC's embattled 2008 leased access rules, there's no clear picture as to what -- if anything -- the agency will do next, with implementation facing big hurdles and some seeing the possibility of the agency instead seeking to roll them back. “I don’t think anybody cares,” said Georgetown Institute for Public Representation lawyer Andy Schwartzman, since the tougher rules former Republican Chairman Kevin Martin tried to put in place never went into effect.

House Appropriations Financial Services Subcommittee Democrats used a hearing Thursday on the FCC's FY 2019 budget request to criticize Ajit Pai's actions since becoming chairman at the beginning of 2017, including media ownership actions seen as benefiting Sinclair's proposed buy of Tribune and the December rescission of net neutrality rules. Republican appropriators highlighted Pai's goals and dived into how the commission would implement telecom policy elements included in the FY 2018 omnibus spending bill that President Donald Trump signed in March (see 1803210041, 1803210068, 1803220048 and 1803230038). The omnibus included text of the Repack Airwaves Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services (Ray Baum's) Act FCC reauthorization and spectrum legislative package (HR-4986).

The FCC and the executive branch are looking at modifying "Team Telecom" reviews of foreign takeovers of U.S. communications assets, according to FCC Commissioner Mike O'Rielly and some industry representatives. O'Rielly last week suggested the FCC will soon revise its process for Team Telecom participation in commission reviews of foreign takeovers of U.S. communications companies and assets. It's up to others how Team Telecom -- DOJ, DOD and the Department of Homeland Security -- structures itself, but the FCC "can certainly decide how comments are going to be processed in our agency," he said at the American Enterprise Institute April 19 (see 1804190045).

The FCC and the executive branch are looking at modifying "Team Telecom" reviews of foreign takeovers of U.S. communications assets, according to FCC Commissioner Mike O'Rielly and some industry representatives. O'Rielly last week suggested the FCC will soon revise its process for Team Telecom participation in commission reviews of foreign takeovers of U.S. communications companies and assets. It's up to others how Team Telecom -- DOJ, DOD and the Department of Homeland Security -- structures itself, but the FCC "can certainly decide how comments are going to be processed in our agency," he said at the American Enterprise Institute April 19 (see 1804190045).

CBP is working on a regulatory update for its prohibition on imports made by forced labor that it hopes will offer some guidance for compliance, said Brenda Smith, executive assistant commissioner-trade at CBP, while speaking at an April 25 American Apparel and Footwear Association event. That should help to alleviate some, but not all, of the concerns over a change in law that requires CBP to treat goods made by North Koreans as made through forced labor, Smith said. "We also have been looking at our regulations to understand where the gaps are and why we are not as effective as we would like to be," she said.

Form letters and fraudulent filings submitted to the FCC during its the public comment process in the net neutrality rescission rulemaking (see 1708030054) “did not affect” the commission's “ability to review the record, respond to comments that raised significant issues, and make a reasoned judgment,” FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said in a letter to Rep. Mike Capuano, D-Mass., released Monday evening. Capuano raised concerns in December, before the 3-2 vote, about “widespread reports of fraudulent comments being submitted to the FCC” on the proceeding and said it was “simply not responsible to rush a vote” when “there is so much concern.” House Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and other committee Democrats have asked the DOJ and the FBI to investigate the “potentially illegal” use of stolen and fake identities to comment in federal rulemaking proceedings, including to the FCC proceeding that resulted in the vote to rescind Communications Act Title II net neutrality rules from 2015. GAO also agreed to review the fake comments issue (see 1706280043 and 1801240024). Any “reasonable review” of the rescission order would demonstrate the FCC “painstakingly engaged with the voluminous public record in this proceeding … in reaching its conclusions,” Pai said. “To the extent you are concerned with non-substantive comments submitted under multiple different names that stated simply that the commenter supported or was opposed to the Title II classification without substantive explanation, as you can see in the Order, the agency did not rely on or cite any such comments.” The commission doesn't “attribute greater weight to comments based on the submitter's identity,” which is why the FCC “has never burdened commenters with providing identity verification or expended the massive amount of resources necessary to verify commenters' identities,” Pai said. Rather “than dwell on how well automated or form submission reflect actual popular support, the Commission has instead focused on encouraging robust participation in its proceedings and ensuring it has considered how the substance of submitted comments bear on the legal and public policy consequences of its actions."

Form letters and fraudulent filings submitted to the FCC during its the public comment process in the net neutrality rescission rulemaking (see 1708030054) “did not affect” the commission's “ability to review the record, respond to comments that raised significant issues, and make a reasoned judgment,” FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said in a letter to Rep. Mike Capuano, D-Mass., released Monday evening. Capuano raised concerns in December, before the 3-2 vote, about “widespread reports of fraudulent comments being submitted to the FCC” on the proceeding and said it was “simply not responsible to rush a vote” when “there is so much concern.” House Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and other committee Democrats have asked the DOJ and the FBI to investigate the “potentially illegal” use of stolen and fake identities to comment in federal rulemaking proceedings, including to the FCC proceeding that resulted in the vote to rescind Communications Act Title II net neutrality rules from 2015. GAO also agreed to review the fake comments issue (see 1706280043 and 1801240024). Any “reasonable review” of the rescission order would demonstrate the FCC “painstakingly engaged with the voluminous public record in this proceeding … in reaching its conclusions,” Pai said. “To the extent you are concerned with non-substantive comments submitted under multiple different names that stated simply that the commenter supported or was opposed to the Title II classification without substantive explanation, as you can see in the Order, the agency did not rely on or cite any such comments.” The commission doesn't “attribute greater weight to comments based on the submitter's identity,” which is why the FCC “has never burdened commenters with providing identity verification or expended the massive amount of resources necessary to verify commenters' identities,” Pai said. Rather “than dwell on how well automated or form submission reflect actual popular support, the Commission has instead focused on encouraging robust participation in its proceedings and ensuring it has considered how the substance of submitted comments bear on the legal and public policy consequences of its actions."

The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act (HR-2809), which the House OK'ed Tuesday evening by voice vote, would sizably change how nontraditional space operations are governed, though issues of orbital debris oversight aren't clear, experts told us. The proposal to give Commerce much oversight that rested with the FAA is a major change that raises some concerns given lack of Commerce expertise, said Michael Listner, principal of the Space Law & Policy Solutions consultancy. House Space Subcommittee Chairman Brian Babin, R-Texas, tweeted the proposal is an "important step ... to secure America’s leadership in space [as it] declares America open for space business."

Any FCC moves to raise the national broadcast station ownership coverage cap or adjust the UHF discount in response to any unfavorable ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit would face a certain legal challenge, but some actions are more viable, attorneys and academics on both sides of the issue said in interviews. FCC action on the cap is seen as a possible countermove to any D.C. Circuit ruling against restoration of the UHF discount, which a three-judge panel appeared to view unfavorably Friday (see 1804200059). It’s not clear what the FCC will do, and most attorneys we asked doubt the agency’s leadership has yet decided anything. Any action to further adjust the UHF discount or alter the cap would likely face a tough time in court, said University of Minnesota School of Journalism assistant professor-media law Christopher Terry.

Appearances of FCC Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioners Brendan Carr and Mike O’Rielly at the American Conservative Union's February Conservative Political Action Conference (see 1802230037) were “consistent with a long tradition” of commissioners “contributing to robust debate on issues of importance to the agency and nation,” said FCC General Counsel Thomas Johnson last week in a letter to House Commerce Committee Democrats. House Commerce ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Mike Doyle, D-Pa., raised concerns in March (see 1803260040). The Project on Government Oversight cited O’Rielly calling for re-election of President Donald Trump as a potential violation of the Hatch Act, which restricts government officials' partisan political activity (see 1802270035). On the advice of FCC lawyers (see 1803020033), Pai turned down a musket presented in connection with the National Rifle Association's Charlton Heston Courage Under Fire Award, awarded at CPAC for his role in the rollback of 2015 net neutrality rules and in dealing with the hostile fallout. The commissioners’ “ability to accept prominent speaking engagements like this one helps promote transparency and accountability and encourages public participation and interest in Commission rulemakings, without contravening applicable ethics obligations,” Johnson told lawmakers. He cited commissioners’ appearances in recent years at events sponsored by the Center for American Progress, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, Progressive Policy Institute, Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society to illustrate a ‘tradition of bipartisan participation in a broad array of legal and public policy conferences” that “does not, and has never been understood to, violate applicable ethics rules.” Participation in CPAC “is not political activity, as defined by the Hatch Act,” so “there was no need for any Commissioner to abide by the limitations that the Act places on the use of appropriated funds, official staff, or agency resources in connection with such activity,” Johnson said. The lawmakers “asked the Commissioners legitimate questions and expected them to respond, not to hide behind their lawyer,” Pallone said in a statement. “The general counsel did not provide any legal reason why the Commissioners could not respond, and we still expect the Commissioners to answer our questions.”