Speech

Indiana is going to be one of the first states in the country to see 5G—the next-generation of wireless broadband. Indiana’s national leadership in mobile broadband is a direct result of this state’s policy decisions. A year ago, community leaders identified the opportunities that come with next-generation broadband and decided to address the challenges that threatened to stand in the way. A year after enacting Indiana’s small cell bill, the results are in—and they are remarkable.

As of 2017, an estimated 6.5 million students nationwide attended schools that didn’t have the Internet bandwidth needed to support digital learning. More than 2,000 schools lacked fiber connections. Notably, 77% of those schools were in rural communities.  If there’s one message you should take away from my being here today, it’s that the Federal Communications Commission is committed to working with educators and state and local leaders across the country to close these connectivity gaps.

For its part, the Federal Communications Commission will not take the value of broadcasting for granted so long as I am Chairman. I’m committed to modernizing our rules in order to allow broadcasting to flourish. Our record over the past year-and-a-half is proof of this. And with your indulgence, I’d like to walk through some of that record.

It is sometimes hard for government to be on the side of innovation. Before change occurs, it’s often easier to identify and focus on those who will be hurt than those who will be helped, even if far more people will be helped in the end. Or to paraphrase the French economist Frédéric Bastiat, policymakers have a destructive habit of focusing on that which is seen, without acknowledging that which is not seen. Instead of viewing innovation as a problem to be regulated based on rules from the past, government should see innovation’s potential, guided by markets that embrace the future.

I want today to register my concern that laws and regulations intended to promote privacy may build protective moats around large companies (some of which already possess significant amounts of data about people) by making it more difficult for smaller companies to grow, for new companies to enter the market, and for innovation to occur—and insist that competition be part of our conversation about privacy. If our concern is warranted, the questions for proponents of new privacy rules then must include: Are we willing to allow a reduction in competition or innovation?

[Speech] At my remarks during yesterday’s opening session, I talked about why we are all here: to help bring the benefits of communications technology to all the people we serve. Before taking questions from Chairman Wilkins and you in the audience, I’d like to talk briefly about how we are pursuing specific policies at the Federal Communications Commission to bring digital opportunity to the people of the United States. In particular, I’ll focus on infrastructure and spectrum.

[Speech] I want to talk about the secret to smart policies about smart cities.  I can summarize my idea in one word.  Learning.

[Speech] The primary focus of my remarks will be the primary focus of my chairmanship since day one: closing the digital divide in order to make sure everyone can benefit from the Internet revolution. To date, I’ve visited roughly 90 cities in 33 states in the US, driving more than 8,500 road miles

[Speech] The Federal Communications Commission has launched an across-the-board review to identify regulations that need to be revised or repealed altogether. Beyond cutting rules that slow network buildout, we’re promoting investment in next-generation networks with a smarter regulatory approach. I often say that dumb pipes won’t deliver smart cities. That’s why we reversed the previous Administration’s decision to impose 20th century utility-style regulations on our 21st century networks.

I have approximately 50 ideas – both old and new – on Federal Communications Commission process reform.