FCC Chairman Ajit Pai

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai issued the following statement on his visit to the Cleveland Clinic and the continued work of the Connect2HealthFCC Task Force: “Today, I had the pleasure of meeting with the visionary leaders at the Cleveland Clinic. I was impressed by the innovative work they are doing in telehealth, particularly in the area of lifesaving tele-stroke services. With technology-based solutions like this, health care providers can deliver high-quality care to patients anywhere. Expanding the reach of medical expertise with connectivity illustrates the potential of broadband to improve people's lives, particularly in rural and underserved areas. That's something I personally appreciate, as the son of two doctors who have practiced for almost four decades in a small town in Kansas. This visit also highlighted the important role of the FCC in bridging the broadband-enabled health gap. That is yet another aspect of the digital divide, which I'm committed to closing. Accordingly, I'm pleased to announce that the Commission’s Connect2HealthFCC Task Force will continue to focus on this important issue. My colleague, Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, has shown passion and leadership on these issues in the past, and she will continue to lead this effort. I look forward to working closely with her on this initiative, which aims to address an increasingly important aspect of digital empowerment."

I’d like to outline some of my guiding principles as Chairman, and then discuss some specific proposals we will pursue.
1) Importance of Digital Empowerment: High-speed Internet access, or broadband, is giving rise to what I have called the democratization of entrepreneurship.
2) The Need for Ubiquitous Internet access: As Chairman, I plan to focus more time and attention than the Federal Communications Commission traditionally has on places where people feel left behind—places that Washington too often looks past.
3) The Power of Competitive Free Markets: The public interest is best served when the private sector has the incentives and freedom to invest and create. That’s why we must eliminate unnecessary barriers to investment that could stifle new discoveries and services. In particular, the government should aim to minimize regulatory uncertainty, which can deter long-term investment decisions.
4) Light-touch Regulation: I believe that a healthy respect for the free market doesn’t mean that government has no role. For example, the FCC must protect consumers and promote public safety. And it will be critical for the agency to be proactive in freeing up more wireless spectrum to allow consumers to benefit from the next generation of wireless services, known as 5G.

Let me turn to how we plan to translate these principles into policies to promote infrastructure and innovation. In the digital age, I believe our wired and wireless broadband networks are core components of our nation’s infrastructure. That’s why my position is clear: If Congress moves forward with a major infrastructure package, broadband should be included. Now, that raises the important question of how those investments should be made. And on this topic, I have a couple of ideas:
1) Any direct funding for broadband infrastructure appropriated by Congress as part of a larger infrastructure package should be administered through the FCC’s Universal Service Fund (USF) and targeted to areas that lack high-speed Internet access.
2) Congress should include in the infrastructure bill my proposal for creating Gigabit Opportunity Zones.

March 8, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai announced that he has launched an investigation into the 911 outage that impacted AT&T wireless subscribers across the United States. “Every call to 911 must go through,” said Chairman Pai. “So when I first learned of yesterday’s outage, I immediately directed FCC staff to contact AT&T about it and the company’s efforts to restore access to emergency services to the American public. I also spoke with Randall Stephenson, AT&T’s chief executive officer, and stressed the urgent need to restore service and to communicate with first responders, as well as AT&T customers, about the status of operations. Additionally, I announced last night that I have directed Commission staff to track down the root cause of this outage."

"The FCC’s public safety professionals are on the case,” said Lisa Fowlkes, Acting Chief of the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau. “Access to 911 emergency services is essential for all Americans, especially the most vulnerable. We will fully investigate this outage and determine the root cause and its impact.”

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Pai sent letters to 30 senators on February 21, 2017, in response to their February 2, 2017 letter, which urged continued focus on ensuring access to mobile broadband services in rural America and closing the digital divide as a top priority for the FCC. Chairman Pai said closing the digital divide is his top priority, and that is why he scheduled a vote on the second phase of the Mobility Fund for the FCC’s February meeting. Chairman Pai also sent similar letters to Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Maggie Hassan (D-NH) and Reps. Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) and Ann McLane Kuster (D-NH) on February 21, 2017, in response to their January 25, 2017 letter, which urged the FCC to move forward with the Mobility Fund Phase II auction.

The Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission are committed to protecting the online privacy of American consumers.

We believe that the best way to do that is through a comprehensive and consistent framework. After all, Americans care about the overall privacy of their information when they use the Internet, and they shouldn’t have to be lawyers or engineers to figure out if their information is protected differently depending on which part of the Internet holds it. That’s why we disagreed with the FCC’s unilateral decision in 2015 to strip the FTC of its authority over broadband providers’ privacy and data security practices, removing an effective cop from the beat. The FTC has a long track record of protecting consumers’ privacy and security throughout the Internet ecosystem. It did not serve consumers’ interests to abandon this longstanding, bipartisan, successful approach. We still believe that jurisdiction over broadband providers’ privacy and data security practices should be returned to the FTC, the nation’s expert agency with respect to these important subjects. All actors in the online space should be subject to the same rules, enforced by the same agency. Until that happens, however, we will work together on harmonizing the FCC’s privacy rules for broadband providers with the FTC’s standards for other companies in the digital economy.

Accordingly, the FCC today stayed one of its rules before it could take effect on March 2. This rule is not consistent with the FTC’s privacy framework. The stay will remain in place only until the FCC is able to rule on a petition for reconsideration of its privacy rules. Two years after the FCC stripped broadband consumers of FTC privacy protections, some now express concern that the temporary delay of a rule not yet in effect will leave consumers unprotected. We agree that it is vital to fill the consumer protection gap created by the FCC in 2015, and today’s action is a step toward properly filling that gap. How that gap is filled matters. It does not serve consumers’ interests to create two distinct frameworks—one for Internet service providers and one for all other online companies. The federal government shouldn’t favor one set of companies over another—and certainly not when it comes to a marketplace as dynamic as the Internet.

So going forward, we will work together to establish a technology-neutral privacy framework for the online world. Such a uniform approach is in the best interests of consumers and has a long track record of success.

In the United States, we are in the process of returning to the light-touch approach to regulation that produced tremendous investment and innovation throughout our entire Internet ecosystem—from the core of our networks to providers at the edge. Together, these policies—light-touch regulation, facilities-based competition, flexible use policy, and freeing up spectrum—have produced impressive results in the U.S. market...

After the Federal Communications Commission embraced utility-style regulation, the United States experienced the first-ever decline in broadband investment outside of a recession. But today, the torch at the FCC has been passed to a new generation, dedicated to renewal as well as change. We are confident in the decades-long, cross-party consensus on lighttouch Internet regulation—one that helped America’s digital economy thrive. And we are on track to returning to that successful approach.

Going forward, the FCC will not focus on denying Americans free data or issuing heavyhanded decrees inspired by the distant past. At the same time, however, we recognize that government does have a role to play when it comes to broadband. We will also create incentives to deploy broadband in parts of our country that private investment hasn’t yet reached. In short, America’s approach to broadband policy will be practical, not ideological. We will embrace what works and dispense with what doesn’t.

On Jan 30, Sen Al Franken (D-MN) wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai urging him to "protect freedom of speech by maintaining and enforcing the Open Internet Order." On Feb 8, Chairman Pai responded by writing, "We share the same goals of promoting a free and open Internet and protecting fully Americans' rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I look forward to working with you to ensure that the FCC's regulatory framework preserves each of these values."

As of last fall, only about 44 percent of the top-selling smartphones in the United States have activated FM chips. By comparison, in Mexico that number is about 80 percent. It seems odd that every day we hear about a new smartphone app that lets you do something innovative, yet these modern-day mobile miracles don’t enable a key function offered by a 1982 Sony Walkman.

You could make a case for activating chips on public safety grounds alone. The former head of our Federal Emergency Management Administration has spoken out in support of this proposal. The FCC has an expert advisory panel on public safety issues that has also advocated enabling FM radio chips on smartphones. It pointed out that, “[h]aving access to terrestrial FM radio broadcasts, as opposed to streaming audio services, may enable smartphone users to receive broadcast-based EAS alerts and other vital information in emergency situations—particularly when the wireless network is down or overloaded.” Moreover, most consumers would love to access some of their favorite content over-the-air, while using one-sixth of the battery life and less data. As more and more Americans use activated FM chips in their smartphones, consumer demand for smartphones with activated FM chips should continue to increase. I’ll keep speaking out about the benefits of activating FM chips.

Having said that, as a believer in free markets and the rule of law, I cannot support a government mandate requiring activation of these chips. I don’t believe the FCC has the power to issue a mandate like that, and more generally I believe it’s best to sort this issue out in the marketplace. For despite the low numbers, we are seeing progress; in the last two years, the percentage of top-selling smartphones in the United States that have activated FM chips has risen from less than 25% to 44%.

Each month, the Federal Communications Commission holds a monthly meeting at which Commissioners vote on proposals and orders drafted by the agency’s various Bureaus and Offices. Routinely after each vote in which an item is adopted, the Commission votes to grant the staff of the relevant Bureaus and Offices “editorial privileges”—that is, the power to make changes to the documents that the Commissioners have just voted upon. Two years ago, Commissioner O’Rielly began raising concerns about the process of granting editorial privileges. Specifically, he has suggested that such privileges currently are too broad, insofar as they extend to substantive edits. Filling in a citation in a document is one thing; changing the meaning of that document is another. I believe that Commissioner O’Rielly’s view has merit.

Accordingly, we are going to make changes to the process. Specifically, beginning at this month’s FCC meeting on February 23, editorial privileges granted to Bureaus and Offices will extend only to technical and conforming edits to items. Any substantive changes made to items following a meeting must be proposed by a Commissioner. Moreover, substantive changes to items should only be made in cases in which they are required, pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, as a response to new arguments made in a Commissioner’s dissenting statement. I thank Commissioner O’Rielly for his hard work on the issue of process reform and look forward to implementing more of his suggestions going forward.

I am instituting an important process reform measure to enable Commissioners to become more fully involved in the agency’s enforcement activities.
One of the ways in which the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau resolves an investigation is by entering into a consent decree, in which the party being investigated agrees to comply with certain terms in exchange for the government closing its inquiry. But over the past few years, in cases in which the full Commission has previously voted to propose and/or impose a forfeiture, such consent decrees have generally not been presented to the Commissioners for a vote. Instead, they have simply been signed by the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau at the direction of the Chairman’s Office. Indeed, many times, Commissioners were barely given any notice of such consent decrees before they were publicly released by the Bureau.
That process ends now. If Commissioners vote to propose and/or impose a forfeiture, the Enforcement Bureau should not settle that matter without their approval. Therefore, I have instructed the Enforcement Bureau that starting today, any consent decree settling a Notice of Apparent Liability or Forfeiture Order issued by the full Commission must now be approved by a vote of the full Commission. This will help promote Commissioners’ involvement in and accountability for important enforcement decisions.
We are putting this reform into practice immediately. This afternoon, the Enforcement Bureau circulated a consent decree for the Commission’s consideration that would conclude an important investigation previously approved by the full Commission. I look forward to working closely with my colleagues on that matter and other consumer protection efforts in the months to come.