Remarks from Chairman Boucher, Commissioner Ohlhausen, and Commissioner Tate at FSF's 'Future of the Internet' Conference

The videos are up from the Free State Foundation’s seventh annual telecom policy conference entitled “The Future of the Internet: Free Market Innovation or Government Control?” The distinguished series of panels and speakers delivered insightful discussions and statements on various issues within telecommunications policy.

In one of the sessions, Free State Foundation President Randolph May had the privilege of speaking with a panel which included Honorary Chair of the Internet Innovation Alliance and former Chairman of the Subcommittee on Communications and the Internet Rick Boucher, FTC Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen, and FSF Distinguished Adjunct Senior Fellow and former FCC Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate. The conversation covered many aspects of the FCC’s recent Open Internet order and the Commission’s regulatory authority.

In her opening statement (around the 8-minute mark of the video), Commissioner Tate listed all of the issues that FCC’s Open Internet order does not address. Despite having 400 pages of regulations, she said that the FCC’s Open Internet order does not:

• Provide broadband to all citizens
• Try to reach the most rural, remote, or tribal lands
• Ensure that schools have the broadband connections they need for our global educational competitiveness
• Provide cybersecurity or trusted environments
• Encourage investment, innovation, or infrastructure expansion
• Streamline government regulations or make them easy to understand
• Reduce costs, whether that be direct costs or indirect costs
• Make data driven decisions

Commissioner Tate then added:

These are all the things that I believe the Commission should be focused on, whether it's cybersecurity, incentivizing private investment, ensuring that our education is globally competitive, certainly providing broadband to our entire nation, and of course reducing the costs to consumers. Those are the areas I think we should be concentrating on. I don’t think this [Open Internet] order does any of these.

In his opening statement (around 11:45 in the video), Chairman Boucher said that the FCC’s Open Internet order is the not correct way to solve Network Neutrality issues. He said:

I’m just going to endorse the statement Commissioner Pai made when he said effectively [the Open Internet order] is using a sledgehammer to hit a nail.

In today’s modern broadband world [with] multimedia [and] many competitors in the space, this [Commission action] is truly a poor fit.

Chairman Boucher then said that Congressional legislation regarding Network Neutrality is the only way to finally put an end to this decade-long debate. He added:

The Title II guarantees for Network Neutrality are highly impermanent. They really rest on a bed of sand. They literally can be swept away in the next presidential election, which in time would create a 3-2 Republican majority in the FCC. And one can be relatively certain that an early order of business for an FCC with a 3-2 Republican majority would be to reclassify broadband as a Title I, lightly-regulated information service.

So the Democrats are, at the moment, celebrating what is a temporary victory. 

Now, the Republicans, ten years after the start, have come to the point where they are saying to Democrats, ‘we will provide the Network Neutrality assurances from the 2010 Open Internet order.’ They have offered that and Democrats should seize that victory.

In her opening remarks (about 23 minutes into the video), Commissioner Ohlhausen showed concern that the FCC’s regulatory overreach will adversely impact the effectiveness of the FTC. She added:

I’m concerned that moving ahead [the Open Internet order] might create some challenges for the FTC to be able to continue to protect consumers online in the way it’s so actively and efficiently done until now.

Given the troubling, very broad language of the FCC’s order, [the FCC] will, at the very least, take up a lot of the FTC’s resources, and perhaps, shut us out of some of the very active consumer protection we’ve been able to do.

Around the 35-minute mark of the video, Chairman Boucher said “Congress created the FCC to be an independent agency and to exercise its independence apart from policy positions announced by the administration.” He then talked about President Obama’s unprecedented announcement in support Title II reclassification and why it is unfortunate that this announcement impacted the FCC’s rulemaking:

In the 25 years that I was a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and served for virtually all of that time on what we use to call the Telecommunications and Finance Subcommittee…I can’t remember a single time in that quarter of a century period when any president, Democratic or Republican, was as explicitly directive of the FCC as President Obama chose to be. I think it really is extraordinary. And frankly, I was quite surprised.

I think the White House involvement made a difference. I think it’s unfortunate. It is extraordinary. And to come back to the precise question you ask, yes, I think it does put in question the extent to which the Commission is truly going to be able to function as an independent body in those instances where the White House announces such clear determination with regard to any particular issue the Commission’s considering.

About 44 minutes into the video, Commissioner Ohlhausen talked about the vast transformation that has occurred in the communications market over the past couple decades. She said that we’ve seen broadband and telecommunications transform from highly concentrated markets to very competitive ones and that such a transformation has allowed antitrust and consumer protection to become useful tools for addressing the occasional problems that might arise.

Commissioner Tate subsequently added to this point. While holding up a news article, she stated:

I have actually brought the headline that the FTC is suing AT&T for throttling, so the FTC is already involved in many of these issues. They have so much of the expertise, as Maureen so eloquently stated, to be able to protect us, consumers!

Commissioner Tate also added that the FCC’s Open Internet order has huge problems “from the individual to the international,” and not to mention that states will be able to use Title II reclassification to levy taxes, fees, and additional rules on Internet Service Providers.

Towards the end of the discussion (around the 54-minute mark of the video), Chairman Boucher discussed how the FCC’s Open Internet order could adversely impact applications, such as Facebook and Twitter:

It seems to me that any application that has any kind of two-way communication component could very well now be classified as a telecommunications service and fall under the ambit of Title II regulation.

Chairman Boucher concluded that the uncertainty about the extent to which applications will regulated by the FCC “is going to have a major adverse effect on investment, and not just investment in the broadband sphere but investment among edge providers.”

The FCC’s Open Internet Order was a popular topic at the conference but other topics such as video policy, spectrum auctions, and universal service were also discussed. Check out and subscribe to the Free State Foundation’s YouTube page for more videos from the conference and past events.

Congratulations to Deborah Tate!

I am pleased to congratulate Free State Foundation Distinguished Adjunct Senior Fellow Deborah Taylor Tate on her appointment by the Tennessee Supreme Court to be Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts in Tennessee. Debi has held many leadership positions during her extraordinary career. Of course, she served as a distinguished FCC Commissioner. After leaving the FCC, Debi was appointed a Special Envoy to the International Telecommunications Union and Laureate for her work with child online protection issues. Moreover, Debi has served the state of Tennessee in several capacities, including working with both of Tennessee’s present U.S. Senators, Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker. 

The Tennessee Supreme Court’s press release lists many of Debi’s past positions, along with her many honors and distinctions. 

I am delighted that Debi will be able to continue in her position as a Distinguished Adjunct Senior Fellow with the Free State Foundation. I am grateful for Debi’s many contributions to the work of the Free State Foundation, and I look forward to her continuing contributions in the future. 

This new undertaking by Debi is just a continuation of her lifelong commitment and dedication to serve the people of her native state of Tennessee and her country. I am proud that one of the ways Debi has chosen to serve – and to continue her longstanding commitment to establishing sound communications policy – is through her affiliation with FSF.

FSF’s Deborah Tate a Finalist for ITU Annual GEM-TECH Award

Deborah Taylor Tate, Distinguished Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Free State Foundation and former FCC Commissioner, is a GEM-TECH 2014 awards’ finalist in Category 6: “Efforts to Reduce Threats Online and Building Women’s Confidence and Security in the Use of ICTs.” Ms. Tate was among a field of 360 nominees from more than 70 countries. This is the International Telecommunication Union’s (ITU) annual special achievement award for outstanding performers and role models in gender equality and mainstreaming in the area of information and communication technologies. Ms. Tate is the ITU Special Envoy and Laureate for Child Online Protection.

Thanks – But Don’t Stop Now!

By Deborah Taylor Tate

A relatively small article which recently appeared under Communications Daily’s section entitled “Notebook” certainly deserves more ink and some applause.

As taxpayers, advocates, and attorneys, we often complain about the inefficiencies of government but rarely say “thank you” when someone – in this case, Diane Cornell, Special Counsel to the Chairman of the FCC – actually tackles the problem head on. With all that is before the Federal Communications Commission, it takes a truly dedicated public servant (and maybe a little bit of an “APA nerd”) to initiate and take on the thankless job of changing processes across all the various bureaus at the FCC that go unquestioned and thus unchanged for decades.

Around the year 2000, I did much the same thing at the state level as Chairman of the Tennessee Regulatory Authority cleaning out over 1,000 stagnant, moot, and often irrelevant dockets. Reviewing internal administrative processes, stale complaints, and thousands of pages of legal briefs is no fun. However, not doing it is a disservice to the public and the entities being regulated.

Over the past few months, Ms. Cornell established a “consent docket,” something I have been advocating for almost a decade. The numbers of closures and dismissals have been substantial – over 700 in several bureaus and a 26% reduction in the backlog in the Wireless Bureau alone. (Especially since the Wireless Bureau has some pretty daunting issues such as the upcoming spectrum auctions on its plate.)

However, the job is not done. There needs to be an established and regular “spring cleaning” which is not dependent on a single individual’s proactivity. Ms. Cornell will need to accomplish this by encouraging the Chairman and full Commission to adopt administrative processes that will become official and institutionalized. While the FCC will never be able to keep up with the speed of technology, at least it could become more efficient internally – sua sponte.

In addition to my congratulations, I am still hopeful that the FCC will accept another important recommendation: establish more pathways for formal mediation and alternative dispute resolution – recognized by courts and even other federal agencies as successful ways to streamline decision-making and reduce the cost and time of litigation and appeals.

Everyone wins, including the FCC.

Of course, the true efficiencies of the agency could be recognized if the FCC refrained from delving into issues, regulation, and rulemaking beyond its clear legal authority.

Ms. Cornell, the bureau chiefs, and the FCC staff should be thanked for spearheading this effort toward increased government efficiency throughout the agency. And, for realizing that sometimes some pretty good ideas can come from across the aisle.

David Honig - "Job Well Done"

I just saw the press release that David Honig, the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council’s co-founder, is retiring after leading the organization as President for 28 years. Yes, you read that right: 28 years!

Truth be told, it would be an exaggeration to say that I am fortunate enough to call David a “close friend.” And it would not be true to say that, throughout his long career, I have always agreed with him or, for that matter, with all of the positions taken by MMTC.

But I do consider David a friend. And I am certainly an admirer of what he has accomplished at MMTC, with the help of his colleagues there. The work that MMTC does is important, and, from where I sit, the organization is very fortunate to have been the beneficiary of David’s dedication, intelligence, and leadership skills for more than a quarter of a century. My Free State Foundation colleague, former FCC Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate, has played a senior leadership role at MMTC for many years, along with friends such as Henry Rivera, Julia Johnson, Erwin Krasnow, Nicole Turner-Lee, Russell Frisby, and others. I’m confident they share my sentiments concerning David Honig’s contributions to MMTC and the cause MMTC represents. 

I don’t know David’s successor, Kim Keenan, and certainly not her shoe size. But I do know she has big shoes to fill. I wish her well, of course. But, most importantly, I wish David Honig all the best as he enters this next phase of what has already been a productive life – and I say “job well done.”