February 2011

January is over, and the House and Senate Committees that oversee telecom issues have officially organized ­ issuing full lists of members, deciding on the rules by which the committees will work, and dividing up the budgets between Democrats and Republicans (thus setting the tone for how well the parties will work together in the 112th Congress). So what will the legislative priorities of these committees be?

The two themes of love and money ­ constituent votes and budget issues ­ that we identified in an earlier post still dominate. However, now that we know who all of the players are, including the subcommittee chairs, we can take these policymakers’ legislative pasts into account, and perhaps identify which specific bills we should see introduced in the coming months. The biggest changes from last Congress are on the House side, where the agenda will be determined by Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI-6th) and the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet Greg Walden (R-OR-2nd) and Lee Terry (R-NE-2nd). The new Chair of Commerce’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Cliff Stearns (R-FL-6th) will have a strong impact on the Committee’s telecom policy too, since he served as the Communications Subcommittee’s Ranking Member last Congress. Chairman Upton enjoys a reputation as solid, pro-business Congressman who is reasonable to deal with. He has chosen to hire former Ranking Member Joe Barton’s (R-TX-6th) well-respected telecom aide, Neil Fried, as his Chief Counsel for telecom matters which gives his staff bench the depth and institutional memory critical for real legislative negotiations.

On February 2, less than two weeks after Verizon filed its unusual motion asking that its appeal of the network neutrality decision be assigned to the same panel that trashed the Federal Communications Commission in the Comcast opinion last April, that panel has denied the motion.

Don't count on sifting through a detailed opinion to obtain subtle nuances of potential significance. The panel’s order consists of a single sentence: “Upon consideration of the appellant’s motion to assign the case to the panel that decided Comcast Corp. v. FCC, it is ordered that the motion be denied.” Verizon’s appellate strategy has thus suffered a serious blow, but an important element of that strategy is still alive, at least for the time being. Its “notice of appeal” is still pending, although the FCC has moved to dismiss that as well.

Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) -- Chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship -- and former Chairman John Kerry (D-MA) introduced the Small Business Broadband and Emerging Information Technology Enhancement Act of 2011, a measure to make broadband Internet more accessible to the nation’s small businesses.

Sens Landrieu and Kerry introduced a similar bill in the 111th Congress. This legislation calls on the Small Business Administration (SBA) to take a lead role in helping our small businesses to access broadband and other advanced technologies. To accomplish this, the legislation requires the SBA to make three, key improvements, including:

• Creating a Broadband and Emerging Information Technology Coordinator to facilitate the development of small business broadband initiatives within the agency, and also to act as a liaison with other federal agencies;
• Requiring SBA resource partners, such as Small Business Development Centers (SBDC’s),to provide technical assistance related to both accessing and utilizing broadband and emerging information technology; and
• Improving the SBA’s popular 7(a) and microloan programs by allowing borrowers to use the proceeds of their loans to finance the purchase of broadband services, equipment or other emerging technologies.

Communication is central to the exercise of international influence and talking to foreigners is better than fighting them.

Communication across national boundaries first of all requires a technology that can span great distances. The Internet and related forms of telecommunication make global conversations far easier, quicker and cheaper than ever before. Secondly, the spread of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) meets the need for a common language and makes it possible for Americans to use their home language when travelling abroad, because others will work in a foreign language in their home country. The third requirement -- mutual understanding -- is more difficult to achieve. In learning English, people also learn about America, but Americans have fewer incentives and opportunities to understand where foreigners are coming from. Foreigners have not learned EFL to advance America's interests, but to advance their own personal or national interests. If different national interests coincide, then all sides can benefit. But when differences arise, those with a better understanding of others they deal with are better placed to get what they want. The result of this asymmetry is that the international spread of English is increasing the soft power of foreigners who know what they want from Washington -- and weakens America's influence with friends as well as potential enemies.