Gov performance

Shortly before the inauguration, I outlined four general areas where actions could be taken to reinvigorate investment: one, undoing harmful policies; two, clearing regulatory underbrush; three, developing and executing a strong pro-innovation agenda; and, four, overhauling the Commission’s arcane processes and its organization. I’m pleased to say that we’ve seen significant progress on each front....The Internet is arguably the greatest man-made technology of my lifetime and a testament to free-market principles embodying the American Dream. The government must remain steadfast that this platform should be unfettered by regulation. Doing so is the way to ensure that the economic revolution and expansion of opportunity, unsurpassed in modern history, will continue for future generations and empower their American Dreams.

[Commentary] These are not normal times. The man in the White House is reckless and unmanageable, a danger to the Constitution, a threat to our democratic institutions. Republicans and conservatives around the country should be just as concerned as Democrats about President Donald Trump’s conflicts of interest, his campaign’s relationship with the Russians and whether he engaged in obstruction of justice. They should call him out when he sows division, when he dog-whistles, when he emboldens bigots. They should stand up for global human rights, for constructive engagement with the rest of the world and for other shared American values that transcend party allegiances.

[Commentary] Several prominent Republicans took to Twitter on Aug 17 to denounce hatred and bigotry in the wake of President Donald Trump's shocking equivocations about the white-supremacist mayhem in Charlottesville (VA). Expressing disapproval in 140 characters or fewer is insufficient when the president angrily asserts that there were some "very fine people" among the bigots waving Confederate battle flags and swastika banners; when torch-bearing marchers chanted "Jews will not replace us"; and when police said one Nazi sympathizer rammed a sports car into a crowd, killing an innocent counterprotester. This is a moment of reckoning for members of the Party of Lincoln: Do they want to stand up for American values, or do they want to keep enabling a president whose understanding of right and wrong has slipped dangerously off the rails? If congressional Republicans choose the former — and history will be watching — they should join together with Democrats to censure President Trump.

Censure is not impeachment. Whether that's appropriate will likely depend on the outcome of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into ties between Russia and the Trump campaign. But censure would constitute a forceful way of rebuking the White House and condemning the vile views of a bigoted fringe, even as those people's right to free speech and peaceful protest is protected under the First Amendment. The political chasm between Democrats and Republicans may be wider than ever. But when it comes to ideologies of hate and racism, the nation's leaders need to speak forcefully with one voice.

Commissioner Michael O'Rielly of the Federal Communications Commission says President Donald Trump was wrong to suggest there were some fine people amongst the racist and neo-Nazi protestors who sparked violence in Charlottesville (VA), and said he was "astounded" by the President's press conference on Aug 16.

"I was not available to comment previously," he said. "But I was just astounded when I got back to town to see what had happened and to see the [President's] press conference yesterday and the transcript from some of that." O'Rielly said he was troubled by the President's comment that there were fine people in both camps. "The President's point I think was wrong. I don't think there are fine people in some of these hateful groups. I don't think you can be a fine person in a hateful group. I don't think those things go together."

Democratic lawmakers are calling for an independent investigation into how the Federal Communications Commission responded to a reported cyberattack in May that crippled the agency’s comment filing system. Sen Brian Schatz (D-HI) and House Commerce Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ) sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) that cast doubt on the FCC’s version of the incident. “While the FCC and the FBI have responded to Congressional inquiries into these [distributed denial of service] attacks, they have not released any records or documentation that would allow for confirmation that an attack occurred, that it was effectively dealt with, and that the FCC has begun to institute measures to thwart future attacks and ensure the security of its systems,” the letter reads. "As a result, questions remain about the attack itself and more generally about the state of cybersecurity at the FCC — questions that warrant an independent review.”

Sen Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) and Rep Frank Pallone (D-NJ) called for an independent investigation into the Federal Communications Commission's claim that it suffered DDoS attacks on May 8, when the net neutrality public comments system went offline. "While the FCC and the FBI have responded to Congressional inquiries into these DDoS attacks, they have not released any records or documentation that would allow for confirmation that an attack occurred, that it was effectively dealt with, and that the FCC has begun to institute measures to thwart future attacks and ensure the security of its systems," the lawmakers wrote in a letter to the US Government Accountability Office. "As a result, questions remain about the attack itself and more generally about the state of cybersecurity at the FCC—questions that warrant an independent review."

Sen Schatz and Rep Pallone, the ranking members of the Senate and House Commerce Committees, also said the FCC has not acted to prevent or mitigate the problem of fake comments flooding the net neutrality docket. "[T]aken together, these situations raise serious questions about how the public makes its thoughts known to the FCC and how the FCC develops the record it uses to justify decisions reached by the agency," they wrote to the GAO.

The Universal Service Administrative Company, the nonprofit organization responsible for administering the E-rate program and other federal universal-service funds, announced August 8 that it would transfer more than $9 billion it oversees out of the private banking market and into the US Treasury.

Moving the funds into the Treasury was one of the recommendations in a report on problems with the Lifeline program recently issued by the Government Accountability Office. Among the reasons GAO cited for recommending such a move: lower fees, better management practices and regulatory safeguards, and the opportunity for the federal government to use the funds as an offset for its debts. The Aug 8 announcement prompted some concerns in a K-12 sector already jittery about the direction of the FCC—and especially its plans for the E-rate—under President Donald Trump and the chairman he appointed, Ajit Pai.

"While there might be some efficiencies associated with switching the E-rate program to a Treasury-managed account, we have concerns that program beneficiaries would lose the benefit of the significant interest that universal-service funds accrue in the private market," said Reg Leichty, a lawyer and lobbyist for the Consortium for School Networking, a professional association representing school technology officers. Leichty also expressed concern that the transfer of funds into the Treasury could be a step towards Congress assuming responsibility for universal-service funds, including an annual determination of how much should be allocated for initiatives such as the E-rate. "We would not want this successful program to be subject to the whims of the annual appropriations process, which has not functioned well for a significant period of time," he said.

A bipartisan quartet of Senators want the Government Accountability Office to fork over some details about the waste, fraud and abuse it identified in the Federal Communications Commission-administered Lifeline low-income broadband subsidy program. Sens Tom Carper (D-DE), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Rob Portman (R-OH) sent the letter to the GAO asking it to send to the FCC and the FCC inspector general (currently David Hunt) details on the specific instances it identified in a report on Lifeline released by McCaskill in June.

They want the FCC IG to be able to identify and pursue the culprits if warranted. The senators also added a plug for the GAO report's recommendations on how the FCC can improve oversight of the program, something new chairman Ajit Pai has long called for. They also want GAO to turn over the results of its undercover testing of the Lifeline program to the committee.

House Commerce Committee Ranking Democratic Reps are demanding answers from the Federal Communications Commission about its “favorable treatment” of Sinclair Broadcast Group, which has been cashing in on a series of agency moves that are easing restrictions on its control of local television stations. In a 12-page letter sent to Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai on Aug 14, Reps Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ), Mike Doyle (D-PA) and Diana DeGette (D-CO) seized on multiple media reports detailing how the agency has been delivering on Sinclair’s deregulatory wish list. “We hope this letter will serve as an opportunity to respond to reports suggesting you have failed to exercise adequate independence as FCC Chairman and that may have resulted in the agency giving unusual and possibly preferential treatment to Sinclair," the three Democrats wrote. They asked Pai to come forward with more information about his office’s contacts with the White House and Sinclair on proceedings related to the broadcaster. They want any correspondence between Pai's office and Sinclair, including any lobbyists or lawyers, and whether Sinclair requested a short time frame.

American Internet users are telling the Federal Communications Commission that mobile broadband is not a full replacement for fast home Internet service. The week of Aug 7, the FCC kicked off its annual analysis of broadband deployment and signaled that it might determine that smartphone access is a proper substitute for cable or fiber Internet. In doing so, the FCC could conclude that broadband is already being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion, and thus the commission could take fewer steps to promote deployment and competition.

There have been over 300 new comments filed since we wrote about this two days ago, almost universally lambasting the FCC's suggestion that Americans might not need fast home Internet service and could make do with mobile broadband only. Mobile is hindered by data caps, limits on tethering, and reliability problems that make it fall short of a wired Internet connection, people told the FCC.