Regulating broadband providers under Title II of the Communications Act is more anachronistic than most argue, said Tad Lipsky, acting director of the FTC Competition Bureau, at the Free State Foundation conference Wednesday. Many in industry say reclassifying saddled broadband providers with a regulatory approach from 1934 when the Communications Act was passed, Lipsky said. In reality, the regulation is modeled on the Interstate Commerce Act, signed by President Grover Cleveland in 1887, he said. The act “has been the model for all of the economic regulatory agencies at the federal level in our history,” he said. “I’m a cheerleader for the light regulation approach,” Lipsky said. “I endorse the philosophy that the temptation to look at the problems of a dynamic and quickly developing industry, and to immediately apply the structure of economic regulation” to guard against future problems “has been a fail.” The Interstate Commerce Commission was eliminated in 1996 and the Civil Aeronautics Board was terminated earlier, he said. “It is in many respects a dubious and highly questionable … system of regulation.” Tom Pahl, acting director of the FTC Consumer Protection Bureau, remembers an era when people had party-line phones, his parents had to visit travel agencies to plan family trips, and there were no YouTube videos on performing simple household repairs. “My teenage son cannot even imagine living under those circumstances.” Pahl said. The internet transformed daily life, he said. “In large part, a free-market, limited-regulatory approach has fostered this transformation while protecting consumers from harm.” The FTC is protecting data security, bringing hundreds of privacy and data security cases, Pahl said. The cases “involved offline and online information and companies large and small,” he said. “They covered all parts of the internet ecosystem, including social networks, search engines, ad networks, online retailers, mobile apps and mobile handsets.” If the FCC returns broadband to a Title I regime, the FTC is “ready, willing and able to protect the data security and privacy of broadband subscribers,” Pahl said. “We have a wealth of consumer protection and competition experience and expertise, which we will bring to bear on online data security and privacy laws.” The standards would then apply to all internet companies, not just ISPs, he said. “Our approach would ensure that the standards the government applies are comprehensive, consistent and pro-competitive.” Companies would be held responsible for the promises they make to consumers and accountable for the misuse of information, he said. “We hold companies responsible for not having reasonable data security practices.”
FCC Commissioners Michael O'Rielly and Mignon Clyburn backed means-testing USF support for broadband/telecom service in high-cost areas. It's "time to fix a fundamental structural defect" in the program, which is the subsidization of communications access for people "who don't need or deserve governmental assistance," they said in a rare joint blog post Wednesday. They sought comment on various questions and hope to bring the issue before the commission "in the very near future." O'Rielly recently said he and Clyburn were working on a draft item (see 1705180061). Representatives of Chairman Ajit Pai, USTelecom and NTCA declined comment.
The FCC’s FY 2018 budget request includes plans for an additional $6 billion spectrum auction, to take place between 2025 and 2027, but offers no more details. Industry lawyers, including former FCC and Capitol Hill officials, said at this stage, the FCC goal may be mostly aspirational and government doesn’t appear to be focused on a particular band. The budget document proposes to extend FCC auction authority to 2027, from a current expiration of 2025. “The Budget proposes to require the auction of additional spectrum by 2027 and further extend the FCC’s auction authority solely to allow this auction to proceed,” it said.
Montana penalties may be unlikely against Republicans for calling voters with recorded endorsements for U.S. House candidate Greg Gianforte (R) by President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence, despite a Montana law banning robocalls. Enforcement of the state prohibition is difficult, Montana’s authority on political ethics told us Thursday. However, complaints are possible under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a TCPA attorney said. Gianforte also faced criticism after reportedly body-slamming a reporter asking questions about healthcare at a campaign event.
The Trump administration FY 2018 budget request would cut FCC funding by about $18 million. The White House unveiled the documents Tuesday, and several stakeholders said Congress won't take up the proposal as drafted. The funding measure comported with a previous outline and moved to nix funding for the CPB, including a small portion of funding as part of a winding-down process.
Rep. Mimi Walters, R-Calif., introduced HR-2546 Thursday to “ensure the Chief Information Office of the Federal Communications Commission has a significant role in decisions related to information technology,” its title said. An aide said the bottom line of the legislation is that it ups the commission’s chief information officer position to the same standing as the chief technology officer. The aide cited the goal of the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act, now law but not applying to independent agencies like the FCC, of empowering CIOs. The legislation extends that IT bill’s goals to the commission, the aide said. The three-page text of the bill shows the full title is the FCC CIO Parity Act.
The FCC is expected to move very quickly on a final order on net neutrality after voting to launch a rulemaking Thursday (see 1705180029). Chairman Ajit Pai said he hoped to move as early as October, industry lawyers said. Former officials said that’s a tough timetable, especially if new commissioners join by then, including possibly a new commissioner to replace Democrat Mignon Clyburn, whose term expires in June.
Nebraska Public Service Commission Executive Director Jeff Pursley didn’t violate his oath by continuing to consult part-time for telecom companies, Nebraska Attorney General Douglas Peterson said in a Monday opinion. Pursley started a five-year term as PSC executive director July 1, 2015, after working as a director of consultant Parrish, Blessing and Associates (PB&A). After joining the PSC, Pursley kept a part-time role focused on federal telephone compliance for three carriers outside PSC jurisdiction: Alaska Communications Systems, Puerto Rico Telephone and Virgin Island Telephone, the AG opinion said. Windstream is a PB&A client subject to PSC regulation, but Pursley doesn’t do any work for it, the AG said. Pursley developed a model to automate population of federal forms and supporting documents for price-cap regulated carriers; he's developing a similar model for rate-of-return carriers, the opinion said. "Mr. Pursley's relationship with PB&A does not, in our view, result in his having an ownership or financial interest that constitutes an 'indirect interest' in any common carrier prohibited by his oath of office,” Peterson wrote. “Services provided by Mr. Pursley for PB&A create no conflict of interest, as they do not involve any work performed for any carrier regulated by the Commission. Nor does Mr. Pursley's work for PB&A create a business or financial interest in a common carrier regulated by the Commission.” The PSC “is pleased the AG’s Opinion found that Director Pursley did not violate his oath of office,” a spokeswoman emailed Tuesday.
Comments are due at the FCC June 15, replies July 17 on a rulemaking notice aimed at removing barriers to wireline infrastructure deployment, which was released in April by the commission (see 1704210041). "The NPRM seeks comment on pole attachment reforms, changes to the copper retirement and other network change notification processes, and changes to the [Communications Act] section 214(a) discontinuance application process," said the summary of the notice in docket 17-84 in Tuesday's Federal Register. "Comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed information collection requirements must be submitted by the public, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on or before July 17." The summary noted the NPRM was adopted in conjunction with a notice of inquiry (NOI) and a request for comment (RFC) on related issues (see 1704200046). An FCC public notice Tuesday noted the NOI was published in the FR Thursday, and it clarified that the comments and replies for both the NOI and the RFC will be due on the same days as those for the NPRM. "These same filing dates apply to any other comment periods related to the Notice in this docket, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and any of the proposed information collection requirements contained in the Notice," it said.
The FCC told a court it reasonably denied SureWest Telephone a waiver from a federally mandated USF state certification deadline the company missed in 2012 (see 1610260025). "This Court has repeatedly stressed that agencies should not waive their rules except where special circumstances warrant deviation and a waiver is in the public interest," said an FCC/DOJ brief Wednesday to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that responded to arguments raised by Consolidated Communications, which took over SureWest. "SureWest’s confusion regarding the Commission’s rules -- which caused a filing error not remedied for many months -- is not the kind of special circumstance that can justify a waiver." In a 2016 concurring statement, then-Commissioner Ajit Pai agreed SureWest wasn't entitled to a waiver due to a simple mistake but said the decision to withhold $2.9 million in interstate common line support "for this minor filing error -- as we are required to do under our rules -- is exceedingly harsh." The case is Consolidated Communications of California v. FCC, No. 16-1431.