Communications Act of 1934

The Federal Communications Commission will vote on April 25 to further expand the government’s power over the Internet. It will do so by implementing President Biden’s call for the FCC to impose utility-style “net neutrality” regulations on the Internet through Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. This decision follows the five-member FCC’s partisan, 3-2 vote last October to seek public comment on this action.

By restoring broadband as subject to the Commission's authority under Title II of the Communications Act, the FCC will assure that a handful of powerful telecommunications companies will not favor themselves and their business partners over consumers, non-profits and small businesses who also seek to speak and to receive information over the internet. However, this is about much more than blocking and throttling; it is also about public safety, national security and privacy.

Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel announced the FCC will vote during its April Open Meeting to restore Net Neutrality, which would bring back a national standard for broadband reliability, security, and consumer protection.  If adopted, the Chairwoman’s proposal would ensure that broadband services are treated as an essential resource deserving of FCC oversight under Title II authority. If adopted, the proposal would:

The claim that restoring light-touch Title II authority and basic Open Internet rules would harm—or did harm, from 2015 through 2018—ISPs’ broadband network investments is extraordinary. Not only because mountains of evidence from the ISPs themselves demonstrate its falsity; it is also extraordinary because the mechanism by which this supposed harm would occur is illogical and unreasonable, and has been proven ever more outlandish over time.  ISPs exist to generate economic returns for their shareholders.

The Federal Communications Commission's mission is to “make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.” The FCC’s vision is to pursue policies to bring affordable, reliable high-speed broadband to 100 percent of the country and encourage the private sector to build, maintain, and upgrade nextgeneration networks so that the benefits of advanced commu

The Federal Communications Commission is poised to raise taxes through its Universal Service Fund—a regressive, hidden tax on consumers' phone bills that funds a series of unaccountable, bloated internet subsidy programs. Rather than giving the FCC carte blanche to expand its balance sheet, Congress must reform the USF's structural problems, reevaluate its component programs, and get the FCC's spending under control. Here is my plan to do that. 

The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) seeks comment on a letter from 69 Internet Service Providers, Trade Associations, State and Local Officials, School Districts, Unions, and Civil Society Organizations [including the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society].

Once Democrats finally secured a 3-2 majority in the Federal Communications Commission, the agency lost no time in approving a long-anticipated proposal to reintroduce net neutrality by reclassifying broadband providers as common carriers. While its commitment to reclassification seems unwavering, the agency has equivocated about the preemptive effect of agency action.

Sen Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) indicated to West Virginia TV station WTRF that Capitol Hill lawmakers were looking at the Universal Service Fund as a source of money for the Affordable Connectivity Program. The USF has about $8.

In these comments to the Federal Communications Commission, the American Library Association affirms support for including Wi-Fi hotspots and services in the E-rate program, ALA urges the FCC to: