July 2015

As Tech Booms, Workers Turn to Coding for Career Change

People across a spectrum of jobs — poker players, bookkeepers, baristas — are shedding their past for a future in the booming tech industry. The money sloshing around in technology is cascading beyond investors and entrepreneurs into the broader digital work force, especially to those who can write modern code, the language of the digital world.

Internet giants like Google and Facebook have long fought over the top software engineers in the country, and that continues. But now, companies in most every industry, either by necessity or to follow the pack, are pursuing some sort of digital game plan — creating lucrative opportunities for computing-minded newcomers who want to reboot their lives.

China Pushes to Rewrite Rules of Global Internet

As social media helped topple regimes in the Middle East and northern Africa, a senior colonel in the People’s Liberation Army publicly warned that an Internet dominated by the US threatened to overthrow China’s Communist Party. Ye Zheng and a Chinese researcher, writing in the state-run China Youth Daily, said the Internet represented a new form of global control, and the US was a “shadow” present during some of those popular uprisings. Beijing had better pay attention. Four years after they sounded that alarm, China is paying a lot of attention.

Its government is pushing to rewrite the rules of the global Internet, aiming to draw the world’s largest group of Internet users away from an interconnected global commons and to increasingly run parts of the Internet on China’s terms. It envisions a future in which governments patrol online discourse like border-control agents, rather than let the US, long the world’s digital leader, dictate the rules. President Xi Jinping—with the help of conservatives in government, academia, military and the technology industry—is moving to exert influence over virtually every part of the digital world in China, from semiconductors to social media. In doing so, President Xi is trying to fracture the international system that makes the Internet basically the same everywhere, and is pressuring foreign companies to help.

Lawmakers could be violating robocall restrictions

Some members of Congress might be inappropriately robocalling their constituents' mobile phones. House members in both parties were a tizzy July 28 after confirming their telephone town halls could violate Federal Communications Commission robocall restrictions. While many in Congress have pushed for robocall restrictions to be tightened, a series of lawmakers suggested the rules should be relaxed or changed to accommodate their outreach. The issue emerged during a House Communciations Subcommittee hearing as lawmakers questioned FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler on a new agency ruling adopted in July that aimed at cracking down on the calls -- which can include unwanted calls that are autodialed or prerecorded. "If I have a tele-town hall in my office, which I do, and there is some company that calls all those thousands of people in my district, are they now prohibited from doing this?" House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR) asked Chairman Wheeler during the hearing. "Unless the consumer has asked to get [the call]," Chairman Wheeler replied. "The statute is very explicit." Chairman Wheeler said it was his view that that method of robocalling people's mobile phone to participate in a town hall is prohibited and always has been. The exception is if a constituent gave prior permission to be called. "Wow, That's interesting," Chairman Walden said. "That would be news to a lot of people."

Chairman Wheeler said the FCC's robocall rules are a strict interpretation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act passed by Congress in 1991. Robocalls to mobile phones in particular are barred except for a very narrow set of circumstances. However, those same informational calls to a landline phone would be permitted. The FCC clarified that Chairman Wheeler was referencing robocalls to mobile phones, when saying lawmaker practices could violate FCC rules. “The Commission’s recent robocall clarifications didn’t impose new restrictions on tele-town halls or Congressional outreach to constituents,” FCC spokesperson Will Wiquist said. “Since 1991, informational calls to landlines have been permitted without restriction, while such calls to mobile phones have required consumer consent,” he added. “As long as vendors for tele-town halls continue to adhere to the decades-old rules, use of these services should pose no issue.”

Revamping Predictive Judgments & Interim Rules

[Commentary] In addition to setting overall timelines for Federal Communications Commission review of agency rules, as I previously recommended, there are two agency practices that warrant re-evaluation: where the agency relies on a “predictive judgment” to establish a policy or rule; and where the agency adopts an “interim” rule. In both cases, the FCC supposedly relies on the best information to make a decision that is inherently time limited. Unfortunately, when utilized, there is often no follow-up with hard facts or final rules. That means those offering or receiving communications services in the marketplace are forced to adhere to rules based on stale decisions or outdated information. We can and must do better. The FCC’s new Process Review Task Force should add these practices to its list due for scrutiny.

Commissioner O'Rielly: AT&T-DirecTV Conditions Less Onerous Than Some

Commissioner Michael O'Rielly of the Federal Communications Commission took aim at the FCC's timeline for approving the AT&T-DirecTV merger and various conditions imposed, then explained that the reason he did not dissent from the conditions -- as did Commissioner Ajit Pai -- was because AT&T and DirecTV indicated they would accept them and "they don’t appear to cause direct harm to other market participants." In fact, he said the conditions were at least "less onerous than some of those extracted in past mergers"-- he did not specify. Commissioner O'Rielly voted for the merger, and concurred in the conditions per his explanation above.

But he still had plenty of bones to pick with them. For example, he said the condition on interconnection disclosure, including submitting deals to the FCC, "inches us that much closer to rate regulation." He called the limitations on usage-based billing "inane." He also said that its imposition of discounted stand-alone broadband for low-income consumers is clearly not merger-specific and will likely increase prices for the majority of customers who will be subsidizing those discounts. "[T]he Commission just can’t pass up an opportunity to push its own objectives, even if it is unrelated to the matter at hand," he said about some of the conditions.

The FCC Must Work to Ensure the Public Interest in the Wake of the AT&T/DirecTV Merger

[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission has recently released the full text of its Order approving the merger of AT&T and DirecTV, with conditions. While we’re pleased that the FCC has addressed many of the most important competitive issues we have raised with this merger, we remain concerned that FCC has not done everything we believe would have been helpful to prevent competitive harms.

Public Knowledge has had two areas of concerns with this merger. First, by buying DirecTV, AT&T would gain an increased incentive to discriminate against competing video services. We have argued that the FCC could not approve this merger without taking steps to counter those harms. Second, especially in light of the consolidating communications marketplace, we have argued that the FCC needs to take seriously its legal responsibility to block mergers unless it can be assured of a concrete public interest benefit. Under the Communications Act, it’s not enough for the companies to show how they would benefit from a merger. The FCC needs to identify concrete ways that a merger would benefit the public.

Taking Care of America: Whose Job Is It?

[Commentary] We live in an exceptional country, we like to tell ourselves. If that’s really so, why are we letting it crumble around us? Regular readers of this column are familiar with my thoughts about the sad state of our communications ecosystem in both telecom and media. We lag in broadband compared to many other nations—in its deployment, adoption, speed, and price. We have allowed a few huge telecom and media companies to control the content and distribution of the broadband Internet and the exciting new technologies that should be making this a golden age of communications. The communications sector has grown to one-sixth of the U.S. economy, yet the majority party in Congress treats it as a side-show. While we should be investing in expanding our communications infrastructure, many legislators are at work to cut the budget of the Federal Communications Commission—the agency charged with encouraging the deployment of broadband and advanced communications across the land. Nobody can be a fully-functioning citizen in the twenty-first century without access to a high-speed, affordable broadband Internet. Or these legislators attempt every stratagem to cut consumer protections and otherwise hamstring the FCC with appropriations riders as punishment for its historic net neutrality rules. It’s more than curious, because the FCC is funded not by tax dollars but by fees for licensing and spectrum use. It actually makes money for the government, so all this budget-cutting is kabuki theater for those whose real goal is gutting government, no matter what the program. The FCC is not allowed to use most of the money it raises. Can’t the nay-sayers in Congress recognize a profit center when they see one? Think about that. The “know the cost of everything and value of nothing” crowd is telling the agency that should be looking after our communications safety, cyber-security, and threats of Internet terrorism that it should reduce its largely self-funded activities. The FCC workforce has actually declined by double digit percentages since I went there as a Commissioner in 2001—yet it has so much more that it should be doing for consumer protection and national security. I can predict this much: if and when another act of terrorism like 9/11 occurs and our communications infrastructure fails again, people will be asking Congress how it was, after all the intervening years, that those supposed to be keeping watch weren’t really watching. It won’t be a rhetorical question; I suspect an electoral house-cleaning would ensue. The costs of addressing our various national shortfalls are, obviously, enormous. These are not one-shot, one hundred day, or even one thousand day endeavors. They can be achieved only with a sense of commitment and national mission matching the best America has ever done.
[Copps leads the Media and Democracy Reform Initiative at Common Cause.]

Recap: FCC Oversight Hearing

The House Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology held a Federal Communications Commission oversight hearing on July 28, 2015. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and fellow Commissioner Ajit Pai testified. The issues on the agenda were the Broadcast Incentive Auction, the FCC’s revision of competitive bidding rules governing the Designated Entity (DE) program, Privacy, and FCC Process Reform. Generally, the Republicans at the hearing talked about their concerns with FCC policies, while Democrats generally defended the commission under Chairman Wheeler as furthering competition and protecting consumers.

On a happy note, Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR) began by saying, “At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I continue to be concerned with the Commission’s failure to adhere to sound regulatory process. For the nearly five years that I have chaired this subcommittee, I have consistently pushed to make the FCC a better, more transparent agency, only to see the chasm between the Commissioners deepen over that time. When this Committee considered process reform legislation a few months ago, I had hoped that we had reached the bottom of the well. That the Commission would begin to find its way back to the collegiality and honest policy debates and compromises that have characterized the FCC since 1934. Unfortunately, that hasn’t been the case. And if Commissioner Pai’s testimony is any indication, things might actually be getting worse. This is disappointing, to say the least.”

On FCC process reform, full Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) said, “As we continue our oversight of the Federal Communications Commission, I remain concerned that little has improved since our last oversight hearing in March. Our work to institute real process reforms has traversed multiple chairmen and comes from our desire to guide the agency in a direction that works for the American people and enhances innovation, investment and jobs creation."

Subcommittee Ranking Member Anna Eshoo (D-CA) said Republican appropriators "really screwed" the Federal Communications Commission in the appropriations process. She lamented the proposed $25 million cuts to the FCC's budget in the House Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill, as well as the policy riders that would temporarily block enforcement of net neutrality rules. The House proposal contains funding levels of $315 million for the FCC in 2016, while the Senate version contains $5 million more. The FCC is requesting $388 million, as the agency plans to move its physical workspace. Noting President Barack Obama is "not going to sign something like that," Eshoo predicted Congress would eventually have to approve another omnibus bill to fund government agencies to avoid a shutdown. Rep Eshoo asked Chairman Wheeler to have his staff draft a memo describing what the FCC would be able to do with the proposed budget cuts or if an omnibus is passed.

USDA Announces First Private Sector Investments through US Rural Infrastructure Opportunity Fund

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced the first round of investments in rural infrastructure projects through the US Rural Infrastructure Opportunity Fund. Through the Fund and its expanded public-private partnerships, USDA has facilitated the investment of nearly $161 million in private capital 22 critical water and community facilities projects in 14 states, maximizing the impact of USDA's own investments in job-creating rural infrastructure projects across the country. Strong, secure infrastructure-roads and bridges, but also internet access and community facilities like hospitals and schools-improves connectivity and access to information, moves products to market, and makes communities competitive and attractive to new businesses and investments.

Investments include 11 community facilities projects in Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wisconsin, including building new nursing homes, constructing new preschool and day care facilities, constructing a new facility for a rural ambulance service that covers a 685 square mile area in South Dakota, and building or upgrading two new critical access hospitals in rural Illinois and North Carolina. In addition, the Fund invested in 11 critical water projects in California, Kansas, Mississippi, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota and Texas. Projects include upgrades to existing water systems and the construction of a new reservoir. At least 38 additional critical infrastructure projects are in the pipeline for investment. The US Rural Infrastructure Opportunity Fund is part of a broader effort across the Department to rethink how to best leverage private sector resources to revitalize and reenergize the rural economy.

FCC Chairman Wheeler's Response to Members of Congress Regarding GAO Report Additional Actions Could Help FCC Evaluate Its Efforts to Inform Consumers

In a response to several members of Congress on July 15, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler discussed a May 15 Government Accountability Office report recommending the FCC conduct or commission research on the effectiveness of the FCC's efforts to provide consumers with broadband performance information. Chairman Wheeler wrote that the FCC has taken steps already to carry out the recommendations of the report, including continuing to evaluate its current Measuring Broadband America (MBA) effort to provide better information to consumers about broadband performance. Chairman Wheeler wrote, "In summary, the FCC and its staff appreciate GAO's analysis and recommendations and have begun to implement them. Should you have any questions or comments regarding this matter, I would be pleased to discuss them with you."

Benton

Search