March 2019

Reaction to FCC Proposal to Cap USF

Washington policymakers and advocates are reacting to news that the Federal Communications Commission will propose to cap the Universal Service Fund.

FCC Commissioner Geoffrey Starks took to Twitter: "How can we talk about capping our Universal Service programs at a time when the Commission doesn’t seem to have a good handle on who currently has broadband and who does not?" 

Dept of Housing and Urban Development Charges Facebook with Housing Discrimination Over Targeted Ad Practices

The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced that it is charging Facebook with violating the Fair Housing Act by encouraging, enabling, and causing housing discrimination through the company’s advertising platform. The action follows HUD’s investigation of a Secretary-initiated complaint filed on Aug 13, 2018. HUD alleges that Facebook unlawfully discriminates based on race, color, national origin, religion, familial status, sex, and disability by restricting who can view housing-related ads on Facebook’s platforms and across the internet.

The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208 Million. It’s Collected $6,790.

America’s telecommunications watchdogs have levied hefty financial penalties against illegal robocallers and demanded that bad actors repay millions to their victims. But years later, little money has been collected. Since 2015, the Federal Communications Commission has ordered violators of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a law governing telemarketing and robodialing, to pay $208.4 million. That sum includes so-called forfeiture orders in cases involving robocalling, Do Not Call Registry and telephone solicitation violations.

Title II: Why a law from 1934 is the biggest issue surrounding net neutrality

During both recent House Communications Subcommittee hearings regarding network neutrality, Republican lawmakers have railed against Title II, rules that have been in place since 1934. On March 26, during the bill’s markup hearing, House Commerce Ranking Member Greg Walden (R-OR) called the inclusion of Title II “not necessary” for any net neutrality bill, and argued that it “could provide the federal government with near unlimited and unchecked authority for bureaucrats in Washington that oversee the internet.” However, Democratic lawmakers have argued that such predictions are unfounded g