COPPS BRINGS INTEREST IN INTERNATIONAL, TECHNOLOGY ISSUES TO FCC

Copps, filling FCC’s 2nd Democratic slot, joins FCC after 8 years at Commerce Dept., first as deputy asst. secy. for basic industries and later asst. secy. for trade development. Before that he was senior vp for legislative affairs at American Meat Institute, spent 15 years on Capitol Hill as aide to Sen. Hollings (D-S.C.) and was asst. prof. of history for 3 years at Loyola U. in New Orleans.

Hollings was his sponsor for FCC job and Copps’s views parallel Senator’s in some areas. For example, he said it was too early to advocate changes in Telecom Act. Act “started us down the road to competition, made a fundamental commitment to universal service and attempted to achieve a balance between federal and state regulation,” he said: “We need to persevere. Let’s take what Congress gave us and see if we can make it work.” Asked if FCC could do more to encourage local competition, he said enforcement of current rules was way to go. On issue of foreign ownership of U.S. telecom companies, which Hollings opposes, Copps didn’t take firm stance, saying it was “contentious issue that’s not going to go away.” Govt. ownership “is not the wave of the future,” he said. “Privatization is the wave of the future. That’s the road to economic progress.”

Copps indicated interest in many areas of international communication but dwelled on one in particular -- role of FCC in encouraging foreign govts. to set up independent regulatory bodies, which also was pet project of ex-FCC Chmn. William Kennard. Goal isn’t to “create mini-FCCs” or say U.S. way is best, but rather FCC should share both its successes and failures in helping developing countries set up regulatory regimes, he said. It’s in best interests of U.S. business to help other countries set up “clear” regulatory processes, he said.

Copps said he was “more disposed to be activist than pacifist” on broadcast indecency and violence because it’s “such a concern of the American people.” Asked whether more fines for inappropriate programming would be enough, Copps said penalties could go beyond fines, including license forfeitures. He said Congress gave FCC authority to pursue violations, and “a few letters of inquiry doesn’t meet the needs of the American people.” Copps said he was “surprised” how agency had handled complaints in past, including requiring complainants, rather than stations, to supply tapes or transcripts of alleged violations. He called that “an inordinate burden of proof,” echoing view of Comr. Tristani. Right to use airwaves includes public responsibility, he said, and that could include requiring stations to retain tapes of broadcasts that could be used in investigations. Copps said he was “keenly aware” of First Amendment implications of indecency and violence actions and was strong supporter of free speech. “But there is more we can legally do to enforce the law,” he said. He said agency also could use “bully pulpit” to encourage quality programming.

In response to question about mergers and ownership issues, Copps said “people are always concerned about excess concentration and threats to diversity of voices and choices.” He said “the burden of proof is on supporters of change” in broadcast ownership rules, for example: “I know some of our own rules didn’t come down to us on stone tablets, but someone has to show me the benefits to be gained by changing the ownership rules.” World has “changed dramatically in the last 20 years,” Copps said, and global economy means “big business is here to stay.” But he said there’s “always a need for sentinels at the gates.”

Regulation shouldn’t “dictate” what type of businesses companies enter “when technology and good common sense might indicate they should be somewhere else,” he said. Copps said FCC had big challenge in “staying ahead” of regulatory arbitrage that could occur as companies tried to take advantage of regulation. Asked whether regulation played role in telecom market’s downturn, Copps said many factors were at fault although “regulation always is important to economic development.” Having “clear, transparent” rules is step in right direction, he said. “When the market does come back, if we have our act a little more together, having a regulatory system that sings a little more harmony than the present systems does” will help companies know what’s expected of them, he said.

Asked whether FCC’s efforts to reorganize bureaus was good step toward dealing with convergence, he said he had “never been a believer in reorganization just for reorganization’s sake.” Agency’s efforts are good step but “I've never found a perfect organization. You can move around the boxes to make more efficiency and you really have to do that in a technology like this that’s moving so fast, but we're never going to come up with the ideal organization for the next 20 years. This industry and the technology move too fast.”

On other issues, Copps: (1) Said he was big fan of “public- private partnerships” as means of solving problems and plans to meet with all of FCC’s advisory committees. “I like getting people around the table to identify problems, grapple with challenges and come up with solutions.” He said best way to deal with challenges of converging technology was by gaining such input. (2) Acknowledged DTV transition was “not moving as fast as many had envisioned,” but he said it “is happening” and it was “largely market driven, not government driven.” FCC “may be of service in lowering the rhetoric in the blame game,” Copps said, but he didn’t discuss specific actions on issues such as must- carry, cable compatibility, tuner requirements. On DTV, like other telecom technology issues, Copps said he was “a big optimist” and predicted that “10 years from now this little [economic] blip will look like exactly that -- a blip. This is not the beginning of the decline of the telecommunications revolution.”