Kate Forscey

Public Knowledge Urges Congress to Block Anti-consumer Bills Targeting Digital Rights

Public Knowledge joins six public interest groups in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) urging Congress to oppose three bills targeting consumer protections in the digital age. The bills, the Midnight Rules Review Act (HR 21), the Regulation from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act (HR 26) and the Regulatory Accountability Act (HR 5), would upend longstanding and fundamental structures of federal administrative law. Taken together, they would broadly paralyze multiple expert agencies’ ability to enforce the law, which is especially dangerous in the media and communications sector. Such changes could increase prices, undermine citizens’ health and safety, and even endanger the nation’s communications network.

Kate Forscey, government affairs associate counsel at Public Knowledge, said, "“All Americans rely on modern communications technologies in their day-to day lives and deserve ready and able watchdogs to protect us from corporate abuses like sneaky fees and unexpected data overages, as well as ensuring privacy protections and the reliability of the network, especially in emergencies. These bills would strip consumers of important safeguards that go unnoticed precisely because they have been so effective in protecting people for generations. In a world of ever-increasing consolidation of media power in the hands of two or three companies, these safeguards remain essential to the continued functioning of our democracy and society.

Taking It Back!: FCC’s New Promise to Tackle Forced Arbitration and Protect Consumers

The week of Oct 24, the Federal Communications Commission made two huge moves to help consumers navigate the digital marketplace. The first was to finally pass its long-awaited landmark broadband privacy rules. But tucked inside that order was something equally important, if less high-profile: a commitment by the FCC that by February 2017, it will embark on a proceeding to address mandatory binding (or forced) arbitration clauses.

If these have flown under the radar for you, it’s because they are the epitome of fine print. Forced arbitration clauses are sneaky language injected into contracts, which can eliminate one of your fundamental legal remedies as a consumer: the class action lawsuit. Without the threat of a class action, consumers can be left without a practical legal remedy, which is critical in the event that a company pursues business practices that clearly rip customers off. This move was just the latest example of the FCC fighting for consumer rights in the face of continued pushback from corporate interests. Consumers should cheer loudly - but also remember that this is just the kick-off. Important issues for consumers remain on the FCC’s agenda, and it remains incumbent upon all of us to be vigilant -- to help the Commission enact yet another critical consumer protection in the telecommunications industry, which is central in our daily lives. And, much like in a class action itself, that’s something we can all get behind together.

Public Knowledge Opposes Reckless House Spending Bill Targeting FCC and Consumers

Public Knowledge condemns this latest attempt to hijack critical funding legislation with dozens of provisions that will actively harm Americans, generally dislodge government processes, and once more take aim at the Federal Communications Commission's ability to do its job.

The anti-set-top box language is particularly egregious. The Commission’s current proceeding has been mandated by Congress for 20 years and would relieve millions of consumers of rental fees they currently pay to Big Cable for their set-top boxes. These fees total around $20 billion a year, and consumers have no choice but to pay. The bill also contains three unnecessary provisions intended to scale back the FCC's network neutrality rules, a victory for consumers lauded by millions of Americans. These misguided attacks on the FCC's ability to protect consumers and ensure an open internet fly in the face of the will of Americans nationwide. We are hopeful that moving forward, Congress will reject any bill burdened with language that conflicts with its duty to act in the best interests of the American people.