It’s not for lack of trying that Congress hasn’t overhauled the Communications Act since 1996. In December, House Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., outlined plans to update the landmark telecom law -- initial stakeholder comments posted online Wednesday (CD Feb 6 p8) (http://1.usa.gov/1dsVahV), hearings and white papers in 2014, a bill in 2015. They are hardly the first lawmakers to say they want to transform the act, which marked its 18th anniversary Saturday. Former staffers and congressional leaders involved in past attempts told us why recent high-profile efforts, such as in 2006 led by Republicans and in 2010 by Democrats, failed to succeed and what those experiences might portend for House Republicans now.
The Free State Foundation said the FCC should take seriously Lifeline changes sought by TracFone (http://bit.ly/LQAyuc), including a proposal that eligible telecommunications carriers be allowed to retain income-based and program-based eligibility documentation. The FCC Wireline Bureau sought comment on the petition (http://bit.ly/1eyjELs). “By now, the Commission should be aware of its problematic rules which erect unnecessary barriers to efficient subscriber eligibility determinations,” FSF said in a blog post Wednesday (http://bit.ly/LzfuHL). “Reforms that help ensure Lifeline subsidies are distributed only to eligible applicants, based on a proper application review process, will help achieve the commendable goals of the program. Unlike those parts of the USF program that distribute subsidies in a more indiscriminate fashion, like the high-cost fund, Lifeline provides targeted subsidies to those in need who meet income eligibility requirements. The Lifeline program is worthwhile, but it can only be sustained if it is administered efficiently and with minimal levels of fraud and abuse. That’s why reforms like those proposed by TracFone are necessary to improve the Lifeline program and to maintain public confidence that Lifeline funds are not being wasted."
Companies, associations and think tanks began weighing in last week on how best to overhaul the Communications Act. House Commerce Committee Republicans announced a desire to update the act in December, and they solicited feedback on their first white paper last month. The deadline for commenting was Friday, and several stakeholders released proposals for tweaking the landmark telecom law, with initial comments emphasizing the role of the marketplace and a need to end regulatory silos.
NARUC will consider five telecom resolutions at its winter meeting in Washington, it confirmed this week, releasing a document with all the drafts (http://t.co/xPNT99ZbXi). One proposed resolution, sponsored by outgoing Telecom Committee Chairman John Burke, a member of the Vermont Public Service Board, would ask the FCC to revamp the contribution side of USF. Another draft resolution proposes to improve rural broadband deployment by allowing utilities and critical infrastructure industries to tap Connect America Fund money in unserved and underserved areas where no incumbent provider is given support. Another possible resolution would back location accuracy standards for wireless 911 calls, both indoor and outdoor. One proposed resolution would encourage the National Association of Public Affairs Networks “to establish public affairs networks in every State” -- non-profit television networks akin to C-SPAN, focused on public access and government transparency -- and have each PUC coordinate with the FCC and state executive branches and legislatures, among other stakeholders, to improve digital communications networks. The final draft resolution would ask the FCC to ensure a consumer protection standard before approving any IP transition trials. If approved, it would ask the FCC to make sure “residential and small business customers in affected areas avoid any (i) degradation in the capability, quality and reliability of voice services; (ii) reduction in the availability of voice service options/providers; or (iii) increase in rates for equivalent voice services (such as federal and State Lifeline services).” None of the drafts is NARUC policy until the NARUC board approves them, and the drafts can be substantially modified or rejected outright when considered by the NARUC telecom subcommittee, which consists of state commission staff members, or the telecom committee, consisting of state regulatory commissioners. The meeting will be Feb. 9-12.
The IP transition order FCC members are to vote on Thursday will okay the types of trials AT&T has suggested, where customers in a service area will be transitioned from legacy TDM to IP services, agency officials told us. The order approves and recognizes the benefits for doing trials, which include helping the commission understand the impact of technology transitions on end users, the officials said.
The FCC got lots of advice on process reform (CD Dec 6 p3), as part of an initiative being overseen by Diane Cornell, special counsel to Chairman Tom Wheeler. How much progress Wheeler will be able to make and what might come out of reform efforts is a big question mark, said industry sources including numerous former FCC officials. The full FCC is slated to get an update from Cornell at Thursday’s meeting.
The FCC must find a “coherent approach” to high-cost USF reform in Alaska that recognizes the state’s unique geography, demographics, climate and infrastructure challenges, General Communication told Commissioner Mike O'Rielly and Phil Verveer, senior counselor to Chairman Tom Wheeler, in separate meetings last week, an ex parte filing said (http://bit.ly/1bwlTu6). “Given the extremely large need for universal service support to deploy and sustain modern telecommunications and broadband networks in Alaska, it makes little sense to continue to reduce the total high-cost support to Alaska,” GCI said. “Instead, high-cost reform for Alaska should focus on better targeting that support, tied to the Commission’s broadband deployment objectives.” For example, Phase II of the Connect America Fund could target support to stay away from census blocks where GCI will be an unsubsidized competitor at the end of the wireline competitive eligible telecom carrier support phaseout, said the cable operator, which also provides phone service. It said the commission could also increase the “extremely high-cost threshold for Alaska” to reflect the higher costs of serving those areas. That would also reduce the burden on the limited Remote Areas Funds, said the company.
A move to give states USF money in line with what they pay in to the fund is understandable, but has some troubling implications, said Aspen Institute Fellow Blair Levin Monday in remarks to the Alaska Telephone Association. Levin reacted to legislation introduced in December by Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., which would ensure rural states get back 75 cents of every dollar they pay into the fund (http://1.usa.gov/M6dTts). “The troubling part is that if Senators look at the issue through the lens of their own state and only try to solve for the question of how to get their state more money or find a formula that works best for their own state, we will never improve Universal Service,” Levin said in prepared remarks. “Indeed, it is unlikely that Universal Service will survive, unless, like mythical Lake Woebegone, we can create a situation in which all states are above average in obtaining USF support.” The House Republican leadership is proposing to rewrite the Telecom Act, noted Levin, a Democrat and primary author of the FCC’s 2010 National Broadband Plan: “If the Republicans take the Senate, delivering a bill whose purpose will be dramatic deregulation is not unthinkable.”
FCC Commissioner Mike O'Rielly encouraged commission restraint Monday, as he detailed his policy priorities to a Hudson Institute audience (http://bit.ly/1i4SpJ1). As commissioners prepare to vote on an order Thursday that would set procedures for proposing and evaluating IP transition trials (CD Jan 27 p7), O'Rielly cautioned that trials must not impede the innovation that’s already been happening as the telecom industry has moved to IP. He also elaborated on his vision of “economic freedom” and what it should mean to the FCC.
Rate-of-return regulated ILECs face “different challenges” than those faced by price cap regulated carriers serving rural areas, NTCA Thursday told aides to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, and aides to Commissioners Ajit Pai and Jessica Rosenworcel, an ex parte filing said (http://bit.ly/1dSGxdJ). Any IP transition experiments must be the subject of “thoughtful review in advance” and then “tailored” to account for critical differences between the different regulatory and statutory frameworks governing universal service distribution in those areas, NTCA said. “It should also be made expressly clear that any experiment would not be intended to disrupt current universal service mechanisms or to prejudge potential updates or modifications to those mechanisms,” NTCA said. The commission should avoid using USF funding to support an experiment that would “overbuild networks already supported by USF resources,” it said: The agency should “preclude any opportunity whatsoever for gamesmanship through creating pairing of purportedly ‘unserved’ and served areas."