March 2017

Lessons From a Policy Success

[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission is finishing an “incentive auction” of broadcast spectrum by which it created a market to match the price at which broadcasters were willing to sell spectrum with the price mobile operators were willing to pay. A bipartisan group of House Commerce Committee members described the outcome this way: “The incentive auction’s conclusion with more than $19 billion in bids marks the end of the second-largest auction and years of successful work in bringing market forces to bear on spectrum use policy. … Not only did the auction successfully encourage investment and competition by bringing 70 MHz of licensed and 14 MHz of unlicensed spectrum to meet our nation’s wireless broadband needs, but it also generated $7 billion for deficit reduction.” How did such a success occur and what lessons does it bring to today’s environment? Three stand out.

First, begin with a clear problem statement and generate bipartisan support for solving the problem.
Second, the solution should flow from a process that is transparent, fair, invites all to share credit and incorporates insights from a spectrum of stakeholders.
There’s one more lesson that might prove more controversial, though it shouldn’t. That is that smart, data-driven economic policy will create far more jobs and economic growth than ad hoc, stunt-driven events.

[Blair Levin is a Non-Resident Fellow at the Brookings Institute Metropolitan Policy Project]

How To Fight for Your Rights and Privacy Online

The future looks grim for digital privacy and the open Internet in the United States. Here are six ways you can get involved:
1. Call or e-mail your congressional representatives
2. Contact Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai
3. Check out digital-rights groups
4. Pressure tech companies to do the right thing
5. Know your rights and protect your communications
6. Stay engaged with cyber security developments

Windfall could transform NJ media

[Commentary] New Jersey auctioned off a public treasure - several of its public TV stations - for possibly hundreds of millions of dollars with little public debate or any idea what the governor plans to do with the money. This windfall has received shockingly little public attention. But here's the good news: It's not too late to seize this moment and use this money to transform New Jersey into the national leader in digital public media, local journalism, and civic technology.

Gov Chris Christie (R-NJ) isn't sharing his plans thus far, but the short-sighted solution is use it to plug some of the holes in the lame-duck governor's final budget. The much better idea is to take the revenue from selling off the remnants of 20th-century public media and invest it in building innovative 21st-century public-interest media that meets New Jersey residents' information needs.

[Craig Aaron is the president and CEO of Free Press and the Free Press Action Fund.]

Dish to Rep Eshoo: We Agree Consumers Shouldn't Be Pawns

Not surprisingly, Dish blamed Hearst for the ongoing retransmission consent impasse that kept Hearst stations of the satellite operator. That came in response to a letter from Rep Anna Eshoo (D-CA) late last week. Rep Eshoo, whose constituents are affected by the impasse, said the failure to reach a new deal--Hearst stations in 26 markets have been off Dish for the past two-plus weeks--was harming viewers. She said she was unhappy that the companies did not take steps to keep Hearst stations on Dish during the impasse.

Rep Eshoo pointed out that the station in her market KSBW, was also off during a Hearst-DirecTV impasse earlier this year. She said she hoped they would resolve the dispute ASAP, and said she would continue to push for making retrans "blackouts" illegal, saying consumers should not be pawns in such disputes.

Section 702: Two myths, two concerns, and two final thoughts

[Commentary] I often run across the belief, expressed in print or in person, that Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act allows for bulk collection of information and that it offers no protections whatsoever for non-US persons. Both of these are urban legends; neither of them is factually correct. 702 does not allow collection of bulk data, and 702 does not allow indiscriminate collection of non-US-person communication.

As I testified to Congress, it’s my belief, based on my personal experience and professional judgment, that Congress drew the balance of authority and restrictions in the right place when it enacted FAA 702 in 2008 and when it reauthorized it in 2012. This year provides an important opportunity to FISA Amendments Act to be carefully scrutinized once again. But as Congress continues its work, it’s worth remembering that things that aren’t broke don’t need fixing. Sometimes they just need to be extended as-is.

[April Doss is a partner and chair of the Cybersecurity and Privacy practice group at Saul Ewing. Prior to that, she spent over a decade at the National Security Agency, where she was the Associate General Counsel for Intelligence Law. ]

The FBI Says It Doesn’t Need Encryption for Unclassified Evidence

In a list of technical requirements for a smartphone recording app, the FBI says it doesn't need to use encryption. Encryption can protect data from all sorts of threats: it can stop sensitive information from being read after it is intercepted, or may thwart attackers from getting at data stored on a device. But according to a procurement document published by the FBI, the agency says it doesn't need to use encryption for protecting unclassified audio or video evidence. The snippet is included in a 2016 document laying out the technical requirements for a smartphone recording app that the FBI requested be developed. According to the document, the app would allow both overt and covert recording and streaming.

Despite gains, women remain underrepresented among US political and business leaders

In 2017, 21 women serve in the US Senate and 83 serve in the House of Representatives, comprising 19.4% of Congress. While this share is nearly nine times higher than it was in 1965, it remains well below the 51.4% of women in the overall US adult population. The share of women serving in state legislatures is slightly higher than at the national level. Some 24.8% of state legislators are women, up from 4.5% in 1971.