|
|||||
FEATURED TOPICDigital Transition -The term "Digital Transition" describes the process all organizations must go through in the 21st Century, as they leverage new technologies that provide new options for Applications, Equipment, Processes, and Networks that make them more effective. In contrast, the term "Municipal Wireless" is limiting. It puts the network technology ahead of the application and process changes that drive the business case. ORIENTATION |
« Where There's Smoke ... Part II One State Example | Weblog | Where There's Smoke ... Part IV How Close is Too Close? » Where There's Smoke ... Part III FCC Regulatory ReliefAt the federal regulatory level, it doesn't take long to lose your way unless you are an expert. Not only is there the arcana of administrative case law and politics. Then there's the technical aspects. It takes a special kind of worker to keep track of electromagnetic radiation issues, spectrum propagation, market creation and economics. I'm nodding off even as I type these words, just one paragraph into this post... Here I'll describe some background on this important federal agency and then detail some recent feedback on their performance in promoting a competitive broadband infrastructure for our nation. From the 1934 Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996: For the purpose of regulating interstate and foreign commerce in communication by wire and radio so as to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, a rapid, efficient, Nationwide, and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges, for the purpose of the national defense, for the purpose of promoting safety of life and property through the use of wire and radio communication, and for the purpose of securing a more effective execution of this policy by centralizing authority heretofore granted by law to several agencies and by granting additional authority with respect to interstate and foreign commerce in wire and radio communication, there is hereby created a commission to be known as the ''Federal Communications Commission,'' which shall be constituted as hereinafter provided, and which shall execute and enforce the provisions of this Act. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is comprised of five commissioners appointed by the President to five year terms, with a limit of three from any one political party. So you can imagine the politics involved on this board. Thus my recent musings on how frustrating it must be to be in the minority on this particular body (See The Eternal, Infernal Disharmony in Being Half-Pregnant). From the website, here's a description of the seven operating bureaus and how they work. Bureaus and Offices The Commission staff is organized by function. There are seven operating Bureaus and ten Staff Offices. The Bureaus' responsibilities include: processing applications for licenses and other filings; analyzing complaints; conducting investigations; developing and implementing regulatory programs; and taking part in hearings. Our Offices provide support services. Even though the Bureaus and Offices have their individual functions, they regularly join forces and share expertise in addressing Commission issues. The FCC was created in 1934, back in another era of radio and wire line communications and its task has evolved with technology advances. This part of the website has some good general information on the scope of the commission's activities. Consider this: The FCC was established in 1934 by the Communications Act to assert control over the growing field of communications. In its first year, the FCC regulated a broadcast business which then consisted of 623 radio stations and a telephone industry with 14 million phones. The industry has grown to more than 25,000 TV and radio stations in 2001, and more than 192 million phones in 2000. The percentage of households with more than one phone line increased from 3 percent in 1988 to 29 percent in 1999. Washington Post TechNews, February 2003 Some challenge the need to continue the FCC, while others wish they were more intense in their regulatory function. With a budget of over $300 million and nearly 2000 employees, the question arises of how a regulatory agency continues to grow in size even as the areas they oversee are moving forward into deregulation. See this argument from 2000 for reform of the FCC, published by the Heritage Foundation. So how does their track record look after all these years? Well, not so good recently. They got dinged by a September 2007 GAO Report for being too chummy with those they regulate (See Formal Rulemakings, Informal Rule Breakings: Our Federal Government At Work on Our Behalf). My key position on their track record must then be this: Even as the FCC is tasked to look out for the public interest, as described in their charter above, the agency continues to relax regulations on telecommunication incumbents in the stated hopes of improving broadband infrastructure, yet in the face of a lack of results, even significant record that relaxation of regulations has not been successful in the past - continuing a pattern of actions that don't produce the intended results is neither rational nor sound policymaking. There must be something else going on... Most recently, they again voted along party lines to relax regulations on AT&T in hopes of stimulating investment in broadband...they do keep trying. AT&T's competitors, including Sprint Nextel Corp. and XO Holdings Inc., have vigorously lobbied federal regulators and policy makers to oppose such relief because they said competition would suffer in the broadband market. The FCC, which had until midnight Thursday to make a decision, voted 3-2 for AT&T's petition, which was originally filed July 13, 2006. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said in a statement that removing "overly burdensome regulations" will enable AT&T to invest and deploy more broadband services. But the agency's two Democrats disagreed with the decision, saying the evidence to grant relief was "altogether underwhelming." They added granting relief could lessen competition in certain areas. MSNBC, Oct 12, 2007: AT&T wins relief from government price caps on high-speed Internet access for rivals FCC Chairman Kevin Martin makes a claim that regulatory relief will lead to more investment in broadband infrastructure and services, but he cannot cite a past history with AT&T to demonstrate why he places such faith in this plan, nor does he tie any stringent requirements or milestones for deployment as conditions to grant such relief - he takes it on faith that they will do what they say, when history shows the opposite, at least indicating that some amount of skepticism is in order. The only conclusion I can make, you tell me if you differ - there are other motivations at work among the majority on the FCC board that drive such decisions. Posted on October 21, 2007 at 09:04 PM CommentsPost a comment |
METRONET VENDOR DIRECTORYMY OTHER BLOGSMetroNetIQ E-Store - Be sure to visit the MetroNetIQ E-Store and pick up a copy of The ABCs of Community Broadband: How Digital Transitions Will Transform America's Communities, One at a Time. The E-Store will offer special discounts on this valuable guide for community leaders, discounts that won't be available to the general public on Amazon! |
|||
| Powered by Movable Type | ©2006 MetroNetIQ.com | Website Design by zilkoweb | |||