1. Monthly archive
  2. June 2016

June 2016

Chairman Wheeler's Response to Sens Thune and Gardner Re: the Rural Health Care Program and the Schools and Libraries Program

On May 10, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (R-SD) and Sen Cory Gardner (R-CO) sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler regarding FCC oversight of the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC). The wrote, "In particular, we wish to express our concern that rate-payer dollars dedicated to programs under USAC's stewardship, such as the Rural Health Care (RHC) program, are going toward unnecessary or excessive consulting fees rather than their intended purpose - helping rural health care providers gain access to essential telecommunications and broadband services."

On May 26, Chairman Wheeler responded by noting that, "neither the RHC nor the E-rate program provides support of the sort described in your letter. Specifically, our rules do not allow RHC or E-rate funding to go to consultants that provide administrative support to program applicants." Chairman Wheeler followed by answering, point by point, every question raised by the Sens.

Chairman Wheeler's Response to Sens Flake and Boozman Re: Broadband Privacy Proceeding

On May 19, Senate Technology Subcommittee Chairman Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Senate Subcommittee on Financial Services Chairman John Boozman (R-AR) wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler to extend the comment period for the FCC's proposed broadband privacy rules. On May 26, Chairman Wheeler responded by noting that FCC record does not close when the comment deadlines hit. He wrote, "So while I appreciate your concerns, I do not believe a comment extension deadline is warranted at this time."

Digital Service Programs: Assessing Results and Coordinating with Chief Information Officers Can Improve Delivery of Federal Projects

In an effort to improve IT across the federal government, in March 2014 the General Service Administration established a team, known as 18F that provides IT services to agencies. In addition, in August 2014 the Administration established US Digital Service (USDS), which aims to improve the federal IT services provided to citizens. Office of management and Budget (OMB) also required agencies to establish their own digital service teams.

Government Accountability Office was asked to summarize its draft report that (1) describes 18F and USDS efforts to address problems with IT projects and agencies' views of services provided, (2) assesses these programs' efforts against practices for performance measurement and project prioritization, and (3) assesses agency plans to establish their own digital service teams. GAO's draft report includes two recommendations to GSA and three recommendations to OMB to improve goals and performance measurement. In addition, GAO's draft report is recommending that OMB update USDS policy to define the relationships between CIOs and digital services teams.

How much do ISPs hate competition? They’ll sue the FCC to prevent it

Two lobby groups representing small and medium-sized Internet service providers have taken the first step toward suing the Federal Communications Commission over a ruling designed to boost competition. The groups are trying to overturn a condition imposed on Charter's purchase of Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks.

In exchange for approval to buy the cable companies, Charter agreed to compete against other Internet service providers by building new networks in cities and towns already served by high-speed Internet providers. The American Cable Association (ACA), which represents smaller cable companies in mostly rural and suburban areas, and NTCA—The Rural Broadband Association, which represents small telecommunication companies, each filed petitions to overturn the condition with the FCC recently. This is basically a formality to demonstrate to a court that the groups have exhausted all available options before suing. Assuming the FCC rejects the petitions, the groups will likely file a lawsuit. The "overbuilding" condition "will have devastating effects on the smaller broadband providers Charter will overbuild," the ACA said in a press release. The ACA's petition to the FCC claims that the condition is unlawful because, "It is not tailored to mitigate a merger-specific harm or confirm a merger-specific benefit."

The huge issue that’s keeping Silicon Valley and the Pentagon apart

For over a year, top military leaders have been quietly conducting a charm offensive in Silicon Valley, in hopes that the tech industry might want to work with the Pentagon again like it used to during the Cold War. A lot has changed since then; some in tech don't want to be seen as being too close to the US government for fear of alienating international customers in a globalized world.

Still, Defense Secretary Ash Carter seems determined to rebuild that relationship, making trips out to California, founding a new office meant to get cutting-edge tech into the hands of soldiers and meeting everyone from Facebook to Andreessen Horowitz, one of the Valley's signature venture capital firms. Now one of the partners at Andreessen Horowitz says he's diagnosed a huge challenge that the Pentagon will have to overcome if it wants to woo the tech industry back. "You hit a product cycle problem," said Martin Casado, a former Defense Department researcher who is one of nine partners at the firm, at a Washington conference Friday. "The procurement cycle is too baroque." Casado's putting a finger on a choice that he says faces every start-up that wants to sell its goods to the military, be it software or hardware. At some point, the bureaucratic demands placed by the military on private-sector suppliers become so complicated that tech companies can either 1) stop chasing after government contracts so that they can keep selling to regular consumers like you or me, or 2) agree to focus all their energies on the government, effectively making the Pentagon their only customer.

Google backs President Obama on the trade deal that some tech advocates hate

Google has just lent its support to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an Obama Administration policy priority facing significant hurdles in this fraught election year. The trade agreement includes key provisions about the global passage of digital data, intellectual property and copyright — measures that have drawn criticism from both the political right and left, including several outspoken tech groups. Google’s endorsement isn’t exactly full-throated, but its stake clearly demonstrates another key area of support with the Obama Administration, to which Google is close.

Kent Walker, Google’s SVP and general counsel, wrote, "The TPP is not perfect, and the trade negotiation process could certainly benefit from greater transparency. We will continue to advocate for process reforms, including the opportunity for all stakeholders to have a meaningful opportunity for input into trade negotiations." Google already backed the TPP earlier by proxy — the Internet Association, a tech group that includes the search giant, endorsed the trade agreement in March. Other tech titans, like Apple and Microsoft, have lent their support as well. Signed in February, the TPP awaits congressional approval. However, it has hit political roadblocks from all sides. Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump has called for its abolition. On the left, opponents — including a number of tech startups — describe the TPP as a threat to IP laws and emblematic of opaque policymaking.

Right way wrong way: The fading legal justifications for telecommunications infrastructure rights-of-way

[Commentary] Telecommunications providers use rights-of-way to build physical network infrastructure on lands they do not own. Agreements to use these lands are usually made with public landowners such as local governments. Traditional rules for these negotiations are based on public utilities law and the common law of land ownership. Specific rules for telecommunications providers are also based on common carriage and Carrier or Last Resort regulations. Furthermore, the exercise of property rights by local landowners are often mischaracterized by telecommunications companies as burdensome regulation, with policy and jurisprudence following suit.

This paper argues that in an era of technological convergence and the erosion of traditional pubic interest responsibilities, there are now fewer justifications for the unfettered usage of publicly-controlled lands by telecommunications firms.

[Benjamin W. Cramer is associated with the College of Communications, The Pennsylvania State University.]

House Oversight Asks: Why Do We Have 18F and USDS?

Lawmakers probed the Obama Administration’s vaunted tech teams, searching for answers about the sustainability of a model that cycles private sector developers and engineers into the government for short-term rotations. Both the US Digital Service and 18F, which function as consultancies for other agencies and recruit from tech companies including Twitter and Amazon, have been the subjects of a recent Government Accountability Office review. A draft GAO report surfaced concerns that USDS teams might leave agencies’ chief information officers out of the decision-making process, and that 18F will take several years to recoup its costs, among others.

The two groups -- the White House-based USDS, which troubleshoots wide-reaching federal projects, and the General Services Administration’s 18F, which focuses on smaller undertakings designed to promote agile development -- are part of a broader effort within the Administration to recruit from the private sector. Founded less than three years ago, those teams are joined by similar federal efforts including new Homeland Security Department and Pentagon offices in Silicon Valley. During the hearing, lawmakers tempered their support for updating federal technology with questions about the groups’ relationships with contractors, internal workflow and finances.

Verizon seeks clearance to discontinue collect calling, other legacy voice services

Verizon is petitioning the Federal Communications Commission to get permission to shut down a series of legacy voice services offered via its MCI subsidiary due to lack of use and little customer demand. Similar to an earlier call to discontinue calling card services, Verizon notes in an FCC filing that the services "are all outdated legacy services that have largely fallen out of use." Specifically, the service provider wants to shut down four services: Person-to-Person, Third Number Billing, Collect Call, and Inmate Collect operator services.

© 1994-2024 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.