Gov performance

Democratic Reps launch ‘no confidence’ resolution against President Trump

A group of Democratic Reps stepped up criticism of President Donald Trump, introducing a “no confidence” resolution that officially questions President Trump’s fitness to serve as commander in chief. It logs a laundry list of controversies swirling around the president — including his campaign’s many contacts with Russian officials, his refusal to release his taxes, his verbal attacks on women and the press, and his firing of FBI Director James Comey. Sponsored by Rep Steve Cohen (D-TN), the resolution has been endorsed by 23 more Democratic Reps, including Reps John Lewis (D-GA), John Yarmuth (D-KY), David Cicilline (D-RI), and Judy Chu (D-CA). President Trump’s track record, Rep Cohen said, exposes “a president that you wouldn’t want your children to look up to." "The way he talks about women, the press, the language he uses, the use of Twitter — you don’t want him to be a role model,” he said.

Remarks of Commissioner Clyburn Appalachian Ohio-West VA Connectivity Summit

If you care about robust broadband, if you care about being able to use the internet without your service provider compromising your privacy, picking winners and losers online, if you want infrastructure built in your communities, then you cannot remain on the sidelines. File comments in our open internet proceeding, let your federal Reps or Sens hear about what you think and what you need. Make your voice heard. I, for one, welcome hearing from you, consider your voices and opinions significant and view what you file as substantial. We are not doing our jobs as regulators, if we aren’t listening to you, we are not representing your interests if we fail to understand or consider what you are facing or what concerns you.

I am here tonight in Marietta (OH) because I am using my two ears and will now limit what else I say with my one mouth. My unwavering promise to you this evening, is that I will take what you say back to Washington (DC), and ensure that your stories are told and that they are part of our public policy debate.

Startup That Got a Seat at White House Roundtable Is Part-Owned by Kushner Family

Prominent technology-industry leaders and venture capitalists gathered in the White House’s state dining room in June 2017 to discuss tech policy with President Donald Trump in an event that Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser, helped organize. Seated at the rectangular table alongside the corporate luminaries, university presidents and senior White House officials was a less-prominent figure: Zachary Bookman, the 37-year-old CEO of a small startup called OpenGov. Kushner’s brother, through a venture-capital firm, is a part owner of OpenGov, according to government disclosures and data from Dow Jones VentureSource. Until earlier this year, Kushner owned stakes in the venture-capital firm that he sold to his brother, according to a person familiar with the matter. Kushner’s connection to OpenGov isn’t widely known. Many senior Trump administration officials hail from the business world, triggering concerns about potential conflicts between their private interests and public duties. The OpenGov situation—in which a top White House official helped organize a prestigious event where one of the participants was financially connected to his family—is an example of how such potential conflicts can play out.

FCC Chairman Pai Orders Immediate Action on Lifeline Waste, Fraud and Abuse

In a letter to Universal Service Administration Company CEO Vickie Robinson, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai responded to a recent Government Accountability Office report on potential waste, fraud and abuse in the FCC’s Lifeline program and additional internal FCC investigations. “In light of these investigations and their findings, I believe immediate action is warranted.” He called on USAC to implement safeguards in six areas to ensure Universal Service Fund monies are not used by “unscrupulous eligible telecommunications carriers (ETCs)”:

  • Audit the ten ETCs with the highest number of potential ineligible Lifeline subscribers
  • Review a sampling of Lifeline subscribers each month to determine if they are eligible
  • Require ETCs to verify Lifeline subscribers’ eligibility and de-enroll any subscribers who are not eligible
  • Refer ETC abuses to the FCC’s Office of Inspector General for possible civil or criminal action
  • For addresses with 500 or more Lifeline subscribers, require ETCs to de-enroll subscribers who cannot verify their address and confirm they are “independent economic households” from other Lifeline subscribers -- and, on a quarterly basis, review in a similar way a sampling of addresses with 25 or more subscribers
  • Recapture improper payments associated with de-enrolled Lifeline subscribers
  • Explore automating the process of detecting oversubscribed addresses
  • Step up efforts to identify “phantom,” deceased and duplicate subscribers, de-enroll them, and prosecute ETCs who collect USF funds for serving these fictitious customers
  • Require Lifeline sales agents to register with USAC, block new subscribers enrolled by sales agents who are registering too many customers, and stepping up prosecution of fraudulent sales agents.

Chairman Pai asked USAC to report to him on implementation of these safeguards by August 8, 2017.

Trump FCC deregulation threatens local broadcasting

"There is no other industry in the world like broadcasting,” the CEO of the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) Gordon Smith told his annual convention. “No other industry has, at its core, such an overarching focus on bringing communities together and serving the public good,” Smith opined. “No other media industry is as dedicated to supporting our local communities.” That “overarching focus” on “serving the public good” is being stealthily watered down, with the industry’s support, by the Trump Federal Communications Commission. In little-noticed decisions, the agency has been removing regulatory requirements to protect broadcast localism, shield a diversity of local voices, and avoid the establishment of a dominant national broadcaster.

Exhibit One: imagine broadcast localism without a local broadcast studio. The Trump FCC, voting along party lines, is now preparing to eliminate this “fundamental” part of a licensee’s local community obligation.
Exhibit Two: skirting Congress’ mandate that no single broadcaster have more than 39 percent of the national audience.
Exhibit Three: using contracts to get around local ownership rules.
In short, the Trump FCC has set the stage for a dramatic overhaul of the national landscape. It took no time for one company to seize the opportunity.

Sinclair Broadcast Group, owner of more TV stations than anyone else and a Trump election ally, quickly embraced the new reality. It now appears that broadcast localism, a diversity of local voices, and the congressional mandate against one company dominating local broadcasting are about to become casualties of the Trump FCC.

[Tom Wheeler is the former Chairman to the Federal Communications Commission]

How long will Lifeline be allowed to keep failing?

[Commentary] Suppose you started a program to improve the reading abilities of the 80 percent of lower-income students who cannot read at grade level. This is a worthy cause, so let’s assume that you are spending more than $1 billion annually to fix this. Then someone studies the effectiveness of your program and finds: (1) The children who enroll already read at or above grade level, (2) the percentage of lower-income children reading below grade level has barely changed since you started, and (3) some of the people administering your program are stealing from it. Would you keep your program, or ditch it? If you were the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), you would probably keep it. At least, that is how the agency is treating its Lifeline program, which received another failing grade from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in 2017.

The GAO had already given the program a failing grade seven years ago in 2010. As I have written before, a less complex, less costly, and less corruption-prone way to provide Lifeline’s income benefits would be to provide direct income subsidies to low-income households. This would save the FCC considerable time and effort that it currently devotes to patching Lifeline and would save the GAO the expense of giving the program another failing grade seven years from now.

[Mark Jamison is the Gunter Professor of the Public Utility Research Center at the University of Florida]

Does Lifeline Need a Life Boat?

The Federal Communications Commission’s Universal Service Fund initiatives are important, complex programs that are as necessary as they are challenging to manage. The Government Accountability Office Lifeline report provides additional evidence that flaws in these programs can be used by unscrupulous actors seeking to line their own pockets at the expense of taxpayers and populations truly in need; and that while the FCC’s Lifeline program is essential to those that need it, there is significant room for both improved efficiency and performance.

Statement on Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity

On June 28, the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity issued a letter requesting that states provide publicly available voter data as permitted under their state laws. At present, 20 states have agreed to provide the publicly available information requested by the Commission and another 16 states are reviewing which information can be released under their state laws. In all, 36 states have either agreed or are considering participating with the Commission's work to ensure the integrity of the American electoral system. While there are news reports that 44 states have "refused" to provide voter information to the Commission, these reports are patently false, more "fake news". At present, only 14 states and the District of Columbia have refused the Commission's request for publicly available voter information. Despite media distortions and obstruction by a handful of state politicians, this bipartisan commission on election integrity will continue its work to gather the facts through public records requests to ensure the integrity of each American's vote because the public has a right to know.

[Kris Kobach (R-KS) is Kansas Secretary of State and Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity]

Why almost every state is partially or fully rebuffing Trump’s election commission

Officials in nearly every state say they cannot or will not turn over all of the voter data President Trump’s voting commission is seeking, dealing what could be a serious blow to Trump’s attempts to bolster his claims that widespread fraud cost him the popular vote in November.

The commission’s request for a massive amount of state-level data last week included asking for all publicly available information about voter rolls in the states, such as names of all registrants, addresses, dates of birth, partial Social Security numbers and other data. It immediately encountered criticism and opposition, with some saying it could lead to an invasion of privacy and others worrying about voter suppression. The states that won’t provide all of their voter data grew to a group of at least 44 by Wednesday, including some, such as California and Virginia, that said they would provide nothing to the commission. Others said they are hindered by state laws governing what voter information can be made public but will provide what they can.

Safe is the Word for Trump's FCC, Thankfully

[Commentary] The newly constituted Federal Communications Commission is conservative and deregulatory, but in a way you would expect had any of the establishment Republicans won the White House last November. When Trump won, I worried that he would stack the FCC with nut-job loyalists so that he could follow through with his threats against the media. Luckily, that didn't happen.