Speech

Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim Delivers Remarks at New York University School of Law

With your permission, I will discuss three topics today. First, why antitrust enforcement is such an important part of a free market system. Second, the progress we’ve made in sharing the value of effective antitrust enforcement around the world. And third, a few thoughts on what I hope we can achieve in the future. On all these points, I hope to emphasize the fundamental role of the rule of law and procedural fairness in the application of the antitrust laws. ....

Your Data Is Being Manipulated

At this moment, AI is at the center of every business conversation. Companies, governments, and researchers are obsessed with data. Not surprisingly, so are adversarial actors.

We are currently seeing an evolution in how data is being manipulated. If we believe that data can and should be used to inform people and fuel technology, we need to start building the infrastructure necessary to limit the corruption and abuse of that data — and grapple with how biased and problematic data might work its way into technology and, through that, into the foundations of our society.

Remarks Of FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr At Competitive Carriers Association's 25th Annual Convention

Since this is my first official speech, I want to highlight a few of the issues I hope to focus on during my time on the Federal Communications Commission. I intend for this to be the beginning of a conversation. I welcome all stakeholders to reach out with ideas on where you think the FCC should be heading.

I want to focus my remarks this morning on some of the ways the FCC can incentivize even greater broadband deployment. This is particularly important as we make the transition to 5G—a shift that will require a massive investment in both wired and wireless infrastructure. In fact, if we get the right policies in place, this transition could mean $275 billion in network investment, three million new jobs, and a half a trillion dollars added to the GDP. So how do we get there? How do we ensure that the United States wins the global race to 5G? I want to talk this morning about three of the key pieces—(1) spectrum, (2) infrastructure, and (3) ensuring we have the skilled workforce in place to deploy these next-generation networks—before I talk more broadly about the need for regulatory reform.

Remarks of Commissioner Clyburn, Accessibility Innovations Expo

As you visit the booths and exchange ideas, remember: we simply cannot afford to leave anyone behind in this 21st Century, internet-based economy. While there have been considerable improvements in accessibility to mainstream technology, too many Americans remain unable to utilize our most innovative advancements to their fullest potential. Collectively, we must work to change that reality.

There are more than 56 million people in our country, and over a billion people globally, with one or more disabilities and with advancements in medicine and our focus on fitness, those numbers will continue to climb as we live longer. So the time is now to close the digital divide that too many with disabilities face. We must ensure that technologies are accessible and that anyone and everyone is able to enjoy and benefit from the innovation over the horizon.

Remarks of Commissioner O'Rielly Before the New Jersey Wireless Association

I’m sure that those that love to regulate will try to make the weak case that the status of the wireless industry occurred because of — and not despite — the Federal Communications Commission’s regulations, particularly our Net Neutrality burdens. Beyond being desperate to validate their myopic decision, this argument completely ignores the counterfactual, or what would have occurred absent such burdens. The reality is that had the Commission rejected the liberal mantra of Net Neutrality, the entire wireless picture could have been even better.

Remarks of Commissioner Mignon Clyburn at The Media Institute

What is unsettling is that many of the changes we are currently making at the Federal Communications Commission have a one-sided benefit, and the impact on consumers, competition, and the public interest are mere afterthoughts. The FCC is a regulatory agency, with a charge that requires us to protect the public interest. This means we should strike and maintain the proper balance, when it comes to consumer and industry interests. Yet, when it comes to the future of our media landscape, the FCC majority is embarking on a path, toward a regulatory-free zone....

In just about every other context and every other Universal Service program, we have acted with haste, to remove existing barriers to entry. But when it comes to the Lifeline program, that provides millions the chance to maintain a dial tone or should be providing millions more the opportunity to afford broadband at home, we erect insurmountable barriers to entry for Lifeline providers wishing to do business.

Remarks By FCC Chairman Ajit Pai At The Disability Advisory Committee Meeting

When I spoke to you in March, I noted that the Commission was about to vote on an order to improve VRS interoperability, quality, and efficiency. I am happy to say that this order has since been released, and we have made several other important strides since then. And at our upcoming Commission meeting on October 24, we will vote on an order to apply hearing aid compatibility requirements to wireline phones using Voice over Internet Protocol. The order also would require volume control on cell phones – something the community has requested for over a decade. This would help ensure that people using hearing aids—as well as those without such aids – are better able to select cell phones that meet their communication needs. In particular, this is sure to benefit our growing population of seniors.

In order to expand direct communications for deaf callers, we also are continuing our efforts to educate government agencies on the federal, state and local levels about Direct Video Calling. Finally, people who are blind or visually impaired are gaining better access to television, program guides, and menus because of the Commission’s accessible user interface rules, which went into effect just this past December.

Rosenworcel Testimony at US Senate Commerce Committee NH Field Hearing on "Expanding Broadband Infrastructure in the Granite State"

I think it’s time for a National Broadband Map that offers an honest picture of wired and wireless broadband across the country. Too often the Federal Communications Commission cobbles together data for each individual rulemaking and report without a comprehensive and updated snapshot of where service is and is not. We can build this map in Washington, but it would be great if we had a clearer picture on the ground. I’m a big believer in the wisdom of crowds, so I think we should put it to the public. If you’ve not been able to get service, or live in an area that lacks it, help us make a map and write me at broadbandfail@fcc.gov. I’ve set this account up to take in your ideas. I will share every one of them with the agency Chairman—and put on pressure to do something about it.

For decades, the FCC has led the world with its auction models for the distribution of spectrum licenses. We’ve made a lot of progress powering the mobile devices that so many of us rely on every day. But take a drive along some rural roads and you will know there is room for improvement. It’s one reason why the AIRWAVES Act from Sen Maggie Hassan (D-NH) and Sen Cory Gardner (R-CO) is so important. It helps identify more licensed and unlicensed spectrum that can be brought to market to improve wireless broadband. On top of that, it sets up a fund whereby auction revenues will help support wireless broadband infrastructure in rural America. It’s the kind of creative effort that would in time lead to more coverage on a broadband map and also help bridge the Homework Gap.

Prepared Remarks By Pai Advisor Rachael Bender At The 6th Annual Americas Spectrum Management Conference

I’ve been asked to talk about where we are with spectrum policy in the United States, and what lies ahead. Federal Communications Commission. Chairman Pai has two overarching goals at the top of the Commission’s wireless agenda. First, we want to unleash spectrum to meet growing consumer demand and enable new waves of wireless innovations that will grow our economy and improve the standard of living for the American people. The second key goal of our wireless agenda is harnessing the power of spectrum to help bridge the digital divide.

One foundational principle is flexible use for wireless spectrum. Instead of mandating that a particular spectrum band be used with a specific type of wireless technology, the government should leave that choice to the private sector, which has a much better sense of consumer demand. The Commission has a role to play in crafting light-touch regulatory frameworks, with clear and technology-neutral rules. Basically, we want to put spectrum into the marketplace and then let the market and innovators go to work. Flexible use for spectrum is a proven practice. For decades, it has enabled wireless networks in the U.S. to evolve with technology and to do so much more quickly than if operators had to obtain government sign-off each step of the way. Another principle is our commitment to continue to identify possibilities to put airwaves to more efficient use. Chairman Pai believes we need an all-of-the-above approach to this spectrum endeavor, looking at low-, mid-, and high-band spectrum.

Remarks of FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly Before The 6th Annual Americas Spectrum Management Conference

Next generation systems will capitalize on both new and existing licensed and unlicensed networks, utilizing low-, mid- and high-band spectrum, including millimeter wave frequencies. Today, I will discuss how the Commission plans to make these raw materials available.

Remarks Of Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel at the US Conference Of Catholic Bishops

I am concerned the Federal Communications Commission is gearing up to approve a transaction that will hand a single broadcast company the unprecedented ability to reach more than 70 percent of American households. It hasn’t happened yet. But there are disconcerting signs.

Before I returned to the Commission, the agency inexplicably resurrected an outdated and scientifically inaccurate system for tallying station ownership, known as the UHF discount. It also reversed an effort to investigate joint sales agreements. Both steps helped speed the way for this transaction—which would combine two broadcasting giants: Tribune and Sinclair The bottom line is we are not going to remedy what ails our media with a rush of new consolidation. We are not going to fix our inability to ferret fact from fiction by doubling down on a single company owning ever more of our public airwaves.

Remarks of Commissioner Michael O'Rielly Before the International Institute of Communications' Annual Conference 2017

I will begin by suggesting that in order to properly determine and comment on the larger issue of how the world’s telecommunication regulators are adapting to the changing environment and technological explosion, it is critical to first recognize the differing levels of legal authority that respective governments bestow upon each regulatory agency. In other words, regulators can only regulate when they are authorized to do so.

In the United States, which has seen monumental technological advancements as the result of convergence and digitalization, we constantly struggle with these lines of authority. To act outside our bounds – however meritorious it may seem – can be harmful. It increases uncertainty and can paralyze entire industry segments for months or years with legal challenges and/or legislative responses, thereby depriving consumers of valuable services and opportunities in the meantime. This isn’t just my opinion, as there are numerous examples of Commission actions to highlight this.

Chairman Pai Remarks at Reagan Presidential Library

As the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, I have a special interest in the progress that was made in communications and technology policy during the Reagan Administration. It was an executive order signed by President Reagan that first made the Pentagon’s Global Positioning (GPS) system available for civilian use. FCC Chairmen who served during the Reagan Administration were incredible leaders and visionaries. Mark Fowler and Dennis Patrick each did a fantastic job leading the agency. They moved aggressively to eliminate unnecessary rules and implement President Reagan’s deregulatory philosophy. They set a high bar for those who came after them—and I strive for that bar every day.

The Reagan FCC eliminated the so-called Fairness Doctrine. This misnamed government dictate suppressed the discussion of controversial issues on our nation’s airwaves and was an affront to the First Amendment. The Reagan FCC also built the political foundation for auctioning licenses to spectrum—a free-market innovation blasted back then and widely accepted today. The Reagan FCC introduced “price cap” regulation, reducing government’s role in micromanaging profits and increasing consumer welfare. And the Reagan FCC set the stage for much of the innovation that we see today. In 1985, for example, it had the foresight to set aside what were generally thought to be “junk” airwaves for anybody to use—what we call “unlicensed” spectrum. And entrepreneurs put it to work. Thanks to the FCC’s vision, we now use unlicensed services every day, every time we access Wi-Fi or use Bluetooth or check a baby monitor. Consider this 1985 quote from Mark Fowler, President Reagan’s first FCC Chairman—a quote that applies today: “We want to eliminate, as much as we can, government regulation of the telecommunications marketplace so as to permit present players to provide new and innovative services to consumers and likewise permit new players to come in and compete.” That’s basically our approach today.

Remarks of FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn at Montana High Tech Jobs Summit

A point often lost when we talk about the digital divide is what happens when we actually bridge the divide. Too often, we declare mission accomplished when we’ve connected a home that has been forever without, but I challenge you to take a more nuanced view. We should only claim victory when a consumer is meaningfully using their connectivity to take advantage of the economic, educational, and health care opportunities it affords....

One of our primary goals at the Federal Communications Commission is to be good stewards of ratepayer dollars. That means moving away from the past practice of using our high-cost program to fund multiple networks in the same geographic area. We should not support a company that is serving an area where another provider is providing quality service without a subsidy. That is fundamentally inconsistent with protecting consumers and it does not enable the market to work as intended.

Remarks of FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly Before the IIC International Regulators Forum 2017

It is a pleasure to be here with my fellow regulators to discuss the amazing benefits and challenges presented by the new digital age. My goal today is to provide a picture of how this complex subject is being considered within the United States and what that may mean for my international counterparts.
Please forgive me for having the task of reminding everyone that I do not speak for the Trump Administration or the Federal Communications Commission as a whole. My views are just my own.

The FCC’s regulatory speed – and I am sure this isn’t a US specific issue – quite candidly cannot keep up with technological change or the demands of consumers. Simply put, our rather drawn-out pace is not well suited for the dynamic digital age. For this reason, I maintain that we must be very hesitant to regulate new, disruptive technologies. Instead, the presence of these innovative technologies should lead to reduced regulation of our traditional, more heavily regulated sectors.

Remarks of FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly Before 5G Americas' "Technology Briefing"

Global Harmonization & US Leadership in Wireless Technologies. While some in this country may eschew global harmonization, and I understand that our market position means we have the option of going it alone or in coordination with a handful of other countries, offering commercial services on the same frequencies around the world has many benefits for US consumers and providers. On the consumer side, there is the ability to use your devices and have the same wireless experience at home and abroad. At the same time, the economies of scale created by marketing products internationally enables research, development, and manufacturing costs to be widely dispersed, promoting investment and innovation while reducing the cost of devices and services for Americans.

Remarks of Commissioner Clyburn, Advisory Committee on Diversity and Digital Empowerment

Allow me to quickly reiterate my call for five policies I believe can help move the needle when it comes to digital inclusion. We have seen how the phenomenal success of low-power FM (LPFM) is playing out in local communities across this country. The first call I wish to make, is for us to find ways, in which to replicate and enhance this success story for more underrepresented groups – that are largely minority and women – who are seeking to be a part of the broadcast landscape. Second, in recent years, I have called for the establishment of a pilot incubator program, aimed at increasing the number of women and minority owners in the broadcast space. Third, when divestitures are required during merger transactions, we should urge parties to strongly consider offers from women and minority business owners. Fourth, the time to act on the Commission’s independent programming NPRM is now. With a robust record of more than 36,000 filings, I believe we have enough data to move to a final order, targeting two of the worst offending practices facing many independent video programmers: “unconditional” most favored nation clauses, and unreasonable alternative distribution method provisions. And lastly, with the help of Congress, we can and should reinstate a tax certificate program, focused on promoting opportunities for new entrants.

Remarks Of Chairman Pai At The First Meeting Of The FCC's Committee On Diversity And Digital Empowerment

We recruited you to put you to work. As members of the Committee, your mission is to offer guidance so that the agency can take important steps toward increasing diversity throughout the communications industry and bringing digital opportunity to all Americans.

One of your tasks will be to identify issues that might not already be on the Federal Communications Commission’s radar. Another will be to advise us about issues that we’ve already identified. Another task we’ll assign you is to examine is how we can make sure that disadvantaged communities have access to next-generation networks. Broadband can be a great equalizer when it comes to jobs, health care, education, and civic engagement. But if we don’t bridge the digital divide, communities on the wrong side of that divide will fall further behind in each of these areas. Our goal should be ubiquitous, high-speed networks that bring together all Americans—and I do mean all Americans. Last but not least, we’ll ask you to take a hard look at diversity in Silicon Valley. I look forward to working with you to increase diversity throughout the communications industry and to bring digital opportunity to all Americans.

Chairman Pai Remarks to Kansas Broadband Conference

There’s no question that high-speed Internet is a game-changer for rural Americans. It’s improving standards of living more than any new technology since the rural electrification effort in the early 20th century. That is—so long as you have access. And that’s the big challenge.

Rural Americans too often find themselves on the wrong side of the digital divide. In rural America, 28% of households lack access to high-speed, fixed service. In urban areas, only 2% go without. Rural Americans are missing out on opportunities for jobs, health care, education, and more, and there’s a significant cost to those lost opportunities. But I worry that we’re losing something even greater if rural communities remain stuck in the analog age. That’s the slow fade of rural communities themselves. To be clear, I’m not saying that the digital divide is the reason why rural communities are shrinking. This trend started before the commercial Internet even existed. What I am saying is that how we deal with the digital divide will affect the destiny of towns like Parsons and Ulysses and Beloit and Hiawatha. It’ll help determine if this population loss gets faster, slows down, or is potentially reversed. Broadband-enabled opportunities for jobs, education, health care, and agriculture can be a great equalizer for rural America. But so long as some rural communities don’t have broadband, they’ll fall further and further behind.

To spur network deployment in sparsely populated areas where the economic incentives for private investment don’t exist, the FCC is providing direct funding that leverages—not displaces—private capital expenditures. But we also want to modernize our regulations to give companies a stronger business case to build and expand high-speed networks. The plain truth is that bureaucratic red tape at all levels of government can slow the pace and increase the cost of network deployment.

The Public’s Advocate

We’re here to celebrate former Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler’s public service, and discuss protecting the Open Internet, the most critical communications issue of our time. We’re here today to recognize Tom’s many efforts on behalf of the American people: to uphold the public interest; use the power of communications to strengthen communities; and to modernize and reform programs that bring open, affordable, high-capacity broadband to all Americans. Tom, your work as Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission created opportunities for all Americans to connect to jobs, education, healthcare, and family. And in the years to come, you and your team’s many accomplishments will not be measured by the initiatives you proposed, the dockets you opened, or the votes you won. The day-to-day impacts of your work will be seen in the community that was once left behind, that is now able to get ahead with new broadband options; in the child who can now reach a hand across a keyboard to access a whole new universe of knowledge thanks to gigabit connections to the school and Wi-Fi in the classroom; in the young mother who can now coordinate work and her child’s medical care thanks to her Lifeline connection; and in the small business owner who can now compete on a level playing field with its bigger business competitors thanks to a free and open Internet. In your first major address as Chairman, you stressed that the FCC is the public’s representative in the ongoing network revolution, and you promised to use the Commission’s full authority to protect competition, accessibility, interconnection, public safety, and security. Thank you for delivering on that promise. You are truly .

Taking Away an Open Internet

We gather today at a critical moment in the history of an Open Internet; in the fight for Net Neutrality. So, right here at the outset, let’s make clear something that will bear repeating throughout these remarks: An Open Internet is the law of the land and any change to that policy would take away from consumers, innovators and the competitive marketplace something they have today. The proof point that opponents to an Open Internet must hurdle is the factual basis for why it is necessary to remove existing protections? Those protections can be boiled down to one simple principle: Consumers must be in charge of how they use their broadband connections, free from manipulation by their broadband providers. Unfortunately, those of us who believe the internet should be fast, fair and open are in for a fight. The majority of the Trump Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Republicans in Congress, and the big broadband providers are ganging up on consumers. They mouth the words, “We support an open internet,” yet oppose meaningful protections of that openness. So let me say it again, the current effort is to take away protections that now exist. This is principally about four economically and politically powerful broadband providers – companies that control the connections to 70 percent of American homes – seeking to take something away from tens of millions of consumers and tens of thousands of entrepreneurial innovators. The Trump FCC’s ongoing proceeding to accomplish this is a sham, starting with its name. In the Orwellian world of alternative facts in which we now live, the FCC calls gutting the Open Internet: “Restoring Internet Freedom.” The only thing this effort frees are the broadband providers that escape from their obligations to consumers. The effort to repeal or revise the Open Internet rules is contrary to statute, and contrary to the facts demonstrating how broadband providers can, have, and will abuse their role as gatekeeper to the network that will define the 21st century. And the best its proponents can come up with to support their position are claims of reduced investment that add up to nothing more than special pleading by the biggest cable and telecommunications companies.
[Tom Wheeler is the Walter Shorenstein Fellow for Media and Democracy, Harvard Kennedy School; Visiting Fellow, Brookings Institution; and Klinsky Visiting Professor, Harvard Law School. He served at Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission November 2013 - January 2017.]

FCC Chairman Pai Remarks at Future of Speech Online Symposium

Today, when we talk about universal service, we have in mind bringing high-speed Internet access, or “broadband,” to any American who wants it. Broadband is important for many reasons: it can help you get a job, start a company, get health care, educate your kids, and the like. But it’s also vital for free speech and political engagement. Fewer today seem to be willing to defend to the death others’ right to say things with which they might disagree. The situation on many college campuses is especially distressing.

A strong platform that allows the people to share their ideas and inform themselves about current affairs forestalls that fate. And in a remarkably short time, the Internet has become one such platform. The FCC’s charge and our cultural traditions remind us that we need to extend that online megaphone to all Americans. I look forward to working with you to do that—and to fulfilling this timeless vision for the digital age.

Remarks Of FCC Chairman Ajit Pai At Mobile World Congress Americas

Today, we find ourselves nearing another possible hinge moment. We’ve seen remarkable progress, but it feels like we’re still waiting for another huge breakthrough. Well, 5G could well be what we’re waiting for.

Going from 2G to 3G was the mobile equivalent of switching from dial-up to broadband. Similarly, the transition from 4G to 5G promises to be more than just incremental change— we could see dramatic improvements in network speed, capacity, and responsiveness that will make the impossible possible. One analysis by CTIA suggests that 5G could create three million jobs and over $500 billion in additional GDP growth over seven years in the United States.

Remarks Of Chairman Pai At FCC Workshop On Improving Situational Awareness During 911 Outages

Here at the Federal Communications Commission, the 16th anniversary of the September 11 attacks reminds us that we must do all that we can to improve emergency communications. As it happens, September is also National Preparedness Month. So there’s no better time to recognize that effective communications can be the difference between life and death—whether emergency personnel are responding to a terrorist attack, hurricane, earthquake, flood, or tornado....

But despite the value of social media in times of disaster, our experience with Hurricane Harvey also underscores the importance of not confusing social media as a substitute for calling 911. During the disaster, for example, some public safety entities warned that social media was not the best means of communicating emergency rescue requests. All of this points to the need for best practices about how to communicate effectively both about 911 outages and during 911 outages.