June 2017

Greg Gianforte, the Montana Republican charged with assaulting a reporter the night before he won a seat in the House of Representatives, formally apologized to the reporter and said he would donate $50,000 to a journalism nonprofit as part of a settlement.

Gianforte wrote in a letter to the reporter, Ben Jacobs of The Guardian, that his actions on May 24 were “unprofessional, unacceptable and unlawful.” In the apology, Gianforte promised to donate $50,000 to the Committee to Protect Journalists, an advocacy group for press freedoms and journalists’ rights. “As both a candidate for office and a public official, I should be held to a high standard in my interactions with the press and the public. My treatment of you did not meet that standard,” wrote Gianforte, who won Montana’s lone seat in the House on May 25. “You did not initiate any physical contact with me, and I had no right to assault you.”

Jacobs accepted the congressman-elect’s apology, he said. “I hope the constructive resolution of this incident reinforces for all the importance of respecting the freedom of the press and the First Amendment and encourages more civil and thoughtful discourse in our country,” Jacobs said.

Gov Terry McAuliffe (D-VA) has signed a bill to advance the deployment of the small cell infrastructure needed for next-gen 5G wireless broadband.

According to a summary, the bill (SB 1282): "Provides a uniform procedure for the way in which small cell facilities on existing structures are approved by localities and approved and installed in public rights-of-way. The measure includes provisions that establish requirements applicable to the location of micro-wireless facilities. The measure also addresses restrictions by localities and the Department of Transportation regarding the use of public rights-of-way or easements and specifies when a permittee may be required to relocate wireless support structures."

[Commentary] Net neutrality debates can devolve quickly into talk of statutory “titles” and legal jargon. When that happens, the practical issues at the heart of these debates can get lost. Throughout all this, however, the nation’s rural broadband providers have focused on one primary and practical concern: the chaos that could ensue in the absence of any “rules of the road” with respect to how rural America connects with the rest of the world. Where does this concern come from? Why would rural America be particularly at risk without basic rules of the road? Well, we’ve seen this play out before in the traditional telecom context. Over the past decade, telephone calls destined for consumers and businesses in rural America have failed all too often because it wasn’t worth the time, effort or cost for some routers to make sure calls complete. I shudder to think what would have happened if the Federal Communications Commission lacked authority to address these concerns when consumers began reporting them years ago. Fortunately, the FCC had the authority in that context to adopt and enforce rules to make sure data flows across networks without interruption, delay or neglect. Whatever title the country lands on in this latest spin of the net neutrality wheel, we cannot abandon rules altogether. There’s a balance to be struck. We must focus on the practical goals and substantive outcomes of this debate: making sure that universal service is sustained and that there’s recourse if small rural providers and their customers are shut out or face massive new and unreasonable costs in today’s and tomorrow’s connected world. As long as practical goals like these remain firmly in the headlights, and as long as the framework adopted is legally sustainable, the exact vehicle we use to get there is of secondary importance.

[Bloomfield is chief executive officer of NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association]