Speech

I have approximately 50 ideas – both old and new – on Federal Communications Commission process reform. 

The federal government is recognizing what cities and those of us here in 2013 already knew: that our policies should ensure that bandwidth never constrains economic growth or social progress. Unfortunately, one thing hasn’t changed; the federal government’s view of its own role in helping achieve that goal.  It is: 1) Make cities do all the hard work, pay all the government costs and accept all the blame for whatever happens; and 2) Let the federal government pay none of the costs, do none of the hard work, and take all the credit.

It is a true honor to have the chance to speak before members of the relatively new Cloud Communications Alliance....During times of change, an agency must refrain from subjecting new technologies to old regulatory structures.At a minimum, an agency should not act unless it is clear that the agency has authority, that there is evidence of a market failure warranting intervention, and that the benefits of acting outweigh the costs. Otherwise, regulators risk suppressing further entry, innovation, and investment.

As many of you know, on June 12 Judge Richard Leon of the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled against the US government and in favor of AT&T’s application to merge with Time Warner, without the imposition of any conditions. From the viewpoint of many, both the Federal Communications Commission and Department of Justice have been stuck in administrative molasses, seeking to apply sectoral market analysis, preserve questionable bright line tests, and continue the imposition of rigid restrictions as part of transactional reviews the same way now as in 2008, 1988, or 1958.

We know the need for broadband in rural America. And we know the lost productivity and the lost job opportunities when fast connections are lacking.

We are in the midst of a global race to 5G. There is a lot at stake in winning this race. Being first to 5G could mean three million new jobs, half a trillion dollars added to the GDP, and $275 billion of private sector investment—all without a penny of new taxes. We want that. But our friends and competitors in Europe and Asia want that too. So how are we going to win this race? The good news is that we don’t need to invent a new strategy—we already know the winning playbook. Just as we did with 4G, we have to focus on two things: spectrum and infrastructure.

[S]o long as I am Chairman, I will continue to prioritize ensuring that people with disabilities are not left behind as communications technologies advance. We want people with disabilities to be full participants in the digital revolution. I find this to be a perfect segue to tonight’s event: the Chairman’s Awards for Advancement in Accessibility. Through these awards, we can recognize accessibility innovations and initiatives that help us reach our goal of full inclusion.

I would like to explore three rather divergent policy issues, unified by my views on what I see as being in the best interests of American consumers.

I want to harness your energies this morning to talk about three things we can work on together. First, broadband deployment and the infrastructure challenge it presents for cities. Second, broadband adoption and the challenge it presents for students stuck in what I call the Homework Gap. And third and finally, an update on net neutrality.

In the remainder of this statement, allow me the opportunity to highlight a number of consequential decisions: