Speech

Much has been said and written over the course of the last week about the plan to restore Internet freedom. But much of the discussion has brought more heat than light. I’d like to cut through the hysteria and hot air and speak with you in plain terms about the plan. First, I’ll explain what it will do. Second, I’ll discuss why I’m advancing it. And third, I’ll respond to the main criticisms that have been leveled against it.

Ensuring that we have the skilled workforce in place to deploy, maintain, and upgrade our nation’s communications infrastructure is one of the keys to ensuring that all Americans have access to advanced broadband networks. Importantly, the shift to 5G will require an enormous investment in both wired and wireless infrastructure. In fact, this transition could result in $275 billion in network investment, three million new jobs, and half a trillion dollars added to the GDP.  

The FCC’s latest efforts to quote “reform” the Lifeline Program, will actually decrease the availability of service less for those who stand to benefit the most. As you well know, connecting the unconnected is no easy task. Costs of just a couple dollars a month can be insurmountable for families that struggle to put food on the table each day. But what the FCC majority proposed to do earlier this month, is to take away no-cost service offerings, and eliminate the business model of 70% of providers in the current market

How does antitrust fare in the required reduction in federal regulations? First, antitrust is law enforcement, it’s not regulation.  At its best, it supports reducing regulation, by encouraging competitive markets that, as a result, require less government intervention.  That is to say, proper and timely antitrust enforcement helps competition police markets instead of bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. doing it.

So what does it mean for a government agency to be on the side of innovation? Having served on the FCC since 2012, I’ve certainly had time to think about that question. And I’ve come to the conclusion that the most effective strategy for seizing the opportunities of the digital age is promoting the power of free markets. Instead of viewing innovation as a problem to be regulated based on rules from the past, government should see innovation’s potential, guided by markets that embrace the future.

Simply put, if you truly believe in the transformative power of broadband, as a tool of digital and economic empowerment, your focus cannot begin and end, with infrastructure. If you believe in universal access to 911, if you believe in education, or healthcare, or civic  engagement, if you believe that all of those national purposes are advanced by ensuring all Americans are connected, then you cannot ignore the affordability side of the equation.

Next week the agency plans to vote on an Order clearing the way for Next Generation Television. That means the agency is set to vote to on the introduction of ATSC 3.0. In other words, we are set to change the television standard yet again. I think the way the FCC plans to proceed is no great boon for consumers. It’s a tax on every household with a television. It’s time for the FCC to go back to the drawing board and find a less disruptive way to facilitate broadcast innovation. There’s a way to do it.

The barriers preventing providers from bringing fixed and wireless broadband throughout our nation have increased despite the existence of this committee. The barriers being imposed are not caused by

Even though our net neutrality policies are now legally viable and wildly popular, the leadership at the Commission wants to revisit Internet openness. It has started a proceeding that tears at the foundation of net neutrality. It has proposed cutting the rules we have and instead offering our broadband providers the power to favor sites, content, and ideas; the power to discriminate with our traffic; and the power to become censors and gatekeepers for all that is online. If you want an example, look no further than what happened during the last 14 days with the #MeToo movement.

We are weeks away, from broadband providers being given the green light, to freely engage in paid prioritization, blocking, throttling, or unreasonable discrimination at interconnection points. We are weeks away from the probability, of an entirely new and even wider divide – of those that can afford to pay for priority access, and others that cannot.