The Benton Foundation unequivocally opposes any proposals from the Federal Communications Commission that would allow the FCC to shirk its responsibilities to meet its Congressionally-mandated mission. The FCC is supposed to ensure:

• Quality services are available at just, reasonable, and affordable rates.
• Access to advanced telecommunications and information services are provided in all regions of the Nation.
• Consumers in all regions of the Nation, including low-income consumers and those in rural, insular, and high cost areas, have access to telecommunications and information services, including interexchange services and advanced telecommunications and information services, that are reasonably comparable to those services provided in urban areas and that are available at rates that are reasonably comparable to rates charged for similar services in urban areas.
• There are specific, predictable, and sufficient Federal and State mechanisms to preserve and advance universal service.
• Elementary and secondary schools and classrooms, health care providers, and libraries should have access to advanced telecommunications services.

USF budget reductions or caps could stall and stifle America’s internet opportunity. They would undercut critical efforts to close the digital divide, efforts meant to ensure that every American can take advantage of the transformative opportunities that broadband can deliver. Capping internet opportunity is not the right answer. Rather, the FCC should spend its time working to eliminate the bureaucratic barriers that are preventing these programs from getting the most bang for the buck and achieving their maximum potential. 

We can’t extend broadband’s reach throughout rural America with a USF cap. We can’t solve the homework gap with a USF cap. We can’t ensure that everyone can afford essential voice and broadband service with a USF cap. We can’t bring world-class medical care to rural areas with a USF cap. So why is the FCC talking about a USF cap?

Facebook will begin banning posts, photos and other content that reference white nationalism and white separatism, revising its rules in response to criticism that a loophole had allowed racism to thrive on its platform. Previously, Facebook only had prohibited users from sharing messages that glorified white supremacy -- a rhetorical discrepancy, in the eyes of civil-rights advocates, who argued that white nationalism, supremacy and separatism are indistinguishable and that the policy undermined the tech giant's stepped-up efforts to combat hate speech online. Facebook now agrees with that analysis. The new policy also applies to Instagram.

Google is launching the Local Experiments Project, an effort to fund dozens of new local news websites around the country and eventually around the world. The tech giant says it will have no editorial control over the sites, which will be built by partners it selects with local news expertise. The first effort within the new Local Experiments Project will be ‘The Compass Experiment," which is a partnership between Google and McClatchy to launch three new, digital-only local news operations on multiple platforms. Google says the investments will be significant. "We will be spending many millions of dollars on this overall," says Richard Gingras, Google's VP of news. McClatchy will choose 3 cities that are less than a half million people for the site launches. 

[Prepared statement before the House Economic and Consumer Policy Subcommittee]

Consumer reporting agencies (CRA) collect, maintain, and sell to third parties large amounts of sensitive data about consumers, including Social Security numbers and credit card numbers. This statement is based on GAO’s Feb 2019 report on the CRA oversight roles of Federal Trade Commission and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPR). This statement summarizes (1) measures FTC has taken to enforce CRA compliance with requirements to protect consumer information, (2) measures CFPB has taken to ensure CRA protection of consumer information, and (3) actions consumers can take after a breach. 

In its Feb 2019 report, GAO recommended that Congress consider giving FTC civil penalty authority to enforce Gramm-Leach Bliley Act's (GLBA) safeguarding provisions. FTC lacks a practical enforcement tool for imposing civil money penalties that could help to deter companies, including CRAs, from violating data security provisions of GLBA and its implementing regulations. GAO also recommended that CFPB (1) identify additional sources of information on larger CRAs, and (2) reassess its prioritization of examinations to address CRA data security. CFPB neither agreed nor disagreed with GAO’s recommendations.