Internet/Broadband

In its analysis of data from 2012 through 2014, the Government Accountability Office was unable to confirm the eligibility of 30 percent of Lifeline users it examined. Opponents hail this finding as proof of widespread fraud. However, the GAO didn’t determine that these individuals were ineligible; it was simply unable to verify whether providers had complied with eligibility guidelines. The GAO also conducted undercover investigations, submitting a total of 21 Lifeline applications using false information and fabricated supporting documents. Investigators were able to secure service from 12 of the 19 Lifeline providers. Notably, the GAO underscored that the tests were “for illustrative purposes to highlight any potential internal control vulnerabilities and are not generalizable.”

Although investigators were able to leverage their expertise to deceive certain Lifeline providers, the GAO itself admits this effort doesn’t prove that the program is plagued by fraud. But none of that will stop Lifeline critics — including Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai — from using the GAO report to intensify attacks on the program and malign its users. They will continue to dismiss the tremendous opportunities Lifeline has provided for millions of people — and the millions more whose lives can be improved with Lifeline’s new broadband offerings.

The Fiber Broadband Association commended the Federal Communications Commission’s efforts towards removing regulatory roadblocks to nationwide broadband deployment. FBA also offered significant barrier-reducing steps to help make that happen. First, FBA suggested that the Commission should amend its pole attachment rules to address practices of many pole owners and existing attachers that delay and increase the cost of access. Second, FBA urged the Commission to repeal the 2015 network change notification rule, which imposes an unnecessary and costly process, thereby hindering investment in fiber infrastructure. Third, FBA proposed that the Commission adopt criteria that can be used to readily determine which state and local laws and regulations violate Section 253 of the Communications Act and inhibit broadband deployment.

This study evaluates the estimated impact of the Federal Communications Commission’s recent efforts to remove barriers to investment into next-generation wireless and wireline broadband networks, and thereby to accelerate the transition from legacy copper networks to next-generation services.

We estimate that these proposed changes could have a significant impact not only on new wireless and wireline broadband infrastructure investment, but could also positively impact job creation, economic output and consumer welfare. Our models forecast that with these new rules in place, up to an incremental 26.7 million premises would become economical to serve with next generation networks, driving up to $45.3 billion in capital investment. This investment would be made by incumbent service providers across the country and is expected to take place over at least five years.

The Federal Communications Commission has adopted the order clarifying that the rules on phone privacy are back in effect and dismissing as moot challenges to the telecom broadband privacy rules Congress nullified through a Congressional Review Act resolution. The vote was unanimous but with commissioner Mignon Clyburn dissenting in part and with a lot to say about what she viewed as the remaining lack of clarity about broadband privacy protections.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai circulated the item earlier this month, which also reminds telecoms of their annual privacy compliance certification obligations. The FCC went straight to an order rather than putting the item out for notice and comment, explaining that "because we are simply recognizing the effect of the resolution of disapproval, we find that notice and public procedure are unnecessary to reflect this action in the Code of Federal Regulations."

[Commentary] The online privacy debate belongs in the halls of Congress, with Republicans and Democrats forging a consensus on how best to protect and empower consumers. I know members on both sides genuinely share concerns about protecting Americans' privacy. The BROWSER Act's opt-in regime will give consumers greater control over how their sensitive personal information is shared and establish regulatory consistency by treating Internet service providers and "edge" providers the same. Having two cops on the beat enforcing different sets of rules isn't fair to anybody and will lead to less certainty when it comes to protecting the privacy of Americans.

Broadband privacy sparked the latest Federal Communications Commission dustup. At issue was an FCC order making it clear the 2016 broadband privacy regulations are gone from the agency rule book, as required by a congressional resolution of disapproval back in March. FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn used her partial dissent as an opportunity to argue the Republican majority is willing to leave broadband customers without privacy protections. FCC Chairman Pai took issue with that, saying he brought the “ministerial” item to a vote at her request, but she offered no suggested changes. “I am therefore perplexed by her decision to dissent in part,” Chairman Pai said. “When a commissioner does not share her concerns about an item until after she casts her vote, it makes it difficult to work together to find common ground.”

This reply to "The Curious Absence of Economic Analysis at the Federal Communications Commission" (Faulhaber, Singer, & Urschel, 2017) makes three claims.

First, we document the paper's undisclosed origins as a white paper commissioned by an advocacy group with deep ties to the telecommunications industry. Second, we describe two of the authors' active participation, on behalf of clients, in a range of contested issues before the FCC in recent years, none of which they disclose. Finally, our review of FCC workshops, roundtables, seminars, dockets and rulings—including during its landmark 2015 Open Internet Order and several blockbuster mergers and acquisitions—provides detailed evidence to refute the paper's core "curious absence" charge. The stakes could not be higher, we conclude, as the new FCC chair Ajit Pai has repeatedly referenced the paper to justify his rollback of FCC regulations—including, crucially, the common carriage/net neutrality rules so vigorously opposed by the paper's funders.

In the fierce fight over Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai's effort to roll back the network neutrality rules, it won't be Chairman Pai or his opposition who has the final say. The battle is almost certainly headed to a familiar place — federal court — where judges will determine its fate. Throughout the decade-old debate over whether and how to regulate internet access, the issue has sparked repeated lawsuits that sent FCC officials back to the drawing board. Players on both sides say it’s all but certain this latest go-around will end in litigation again. "When I was general counsel, I didn’t think that what the FCC said was the last word on the matter. I knew there would be a day in court," Jon Sallet, who served as the agency's top lawyer in the Obama era, said during a net neutrality town hall

[Commentary] Network neutrality matters to any Texan who relies on the internet to access journalism, stream videos and stay in touch with friends and family. It’s also particularly critical to Texan startups and entrepreneurs, who rely on the internet to reach new customers without meddling from big, established players.

At Mozilla, we’ve been collecting signatures, comments and voicemails from Americans to share with the FCC. The results have been overwhelming: We’ve already received more than 100,000 signatures, 21,000 comments and 50 hours of voicemails. So, what can Texans do? Speak up during the 90-day public comment period, which runs through mid-August. A broad network of individuals and organizations are preparing an official brief to submit to the Federal Communications Commission that will express our concerns with their policy during this open comment period. We’re also engaging with civic leaders and policymakers here in Texas to discuss the importance of net neutrality. We need to make the coming weeks count — for Texas, all Americans and the internet.

[Surman is executive director of Mozilla. Yokubaitis is co-founder and co-CEO of Data Foundry in Austin.]

[Commentary] Democracy and a stable economy demand access to information. Every citizen and business who values the freedom to search the Internet without restrictions and receive all content consistently should lend their voice to preserving network neutrality rules by submitting comments with strong arguments and clear facts and talking to your peers and representatives about the potential impacts of this plan. The comment period closes July 17, 2017.

[Stewart is a security fellow with Truman National Security Project]