More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Art Brodsky

Art Brodsky

Posted: May 20, 2010 05:05 PM

Summer Rerun At The FCC: AT&T Tries for Scream 2 (Broadband)

What's Your Reaction:

This is a familiar time of year for TV fans. It's the end of the season for original programs and the start of summer reruns for many. Some shows are better the second time around, but some lose their punch, or should, if you see them again and again.

For the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), this summer's big rerun is being brought to you by AT&T, which first broadcast its blockbuster "shock and awe" show last fall. Now it's doing it again. While the FCC may have been spooked by this exercise in intimidation the first time around, there's no excuse for the Commission getting weak in the knees again.

Last September, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski gave a fine speech at the Brookings Institution in which he announced the Commission would move forward with a rulemaking on Net Neutrality -- four existing principles and two new ones to make sure consumers were protected from the telephone and cable companies changing the Internet from one where the consumers determine what and how they see online content to one where the companies set priorities for consumers.

In response, the telecommunications industry, led by AT&T, decided to show the new FCC who was the old boss. They unleashed an unprecedented "shock and awe" campaign dedicated to making certain the FCC backed down before it ever got started. To some degree, it worked, particularly when AT&T got 72 Democrats to sign a letter containing the traditional threats and bullying. The FCC should carefully consider the "full range of potential consequences" on network investment that would result from Net Neutrality, was how the threat read. The FCC chairman was new, his chief of staff was new and many people at the Commission hadn't seen the dramatic lobbying power of the telecommunications industry.

As a result, between the month that Genachowski announced his intention to have the FCC propose rules and the meeting at which the action took place, the FCC caved on some issues dealing with a neutral, non-discriminatory Internet on which they should not have. The FCC was worried about investment and Wall Street, when it really shouldn't have been. AT&T lobbyists crowed at their victory.

Fast forward seven months, now the present. Genachowski has once again announced his intention to move forward on a controversial path. In this case, it is to fix the mistakes of the past, which would hamper the future of broadband in this country. As a result of the April 6 decision of the U.S. Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit, the FCC found itself with little or no legal authority over broadband, the fundamental building block for a new economy. Much of the National Broadband Plan would be in jeopardy without some response from the FCC.

Genachowski, after much deliberation decided to propose a Third Way to deal with the broadband vacuum. Rather than leave it to a non-existent free market, with no protections for consumers, and rather than subject broadband to the full authority of the Communications Act, Genachowski decided to bring the connection between an Internet user's house and the Internet back under FCC's traditional jurisdiction.

With this simple action, the FCC could move forward to guarantee broadband support for rural areas, stabilize the investment climate, help set some rules of the road for the Internet and make sure that a private company can't impose its will on the Internet experience of its customers.

Well, wouldn't you know that the telecom industry didn't see the reasonableness of Genachowski's proposals, which will be considered at the June 17 FCC meeting. Hence, the rerun.

AT&T is once again swarming all over Capitol Hill getting their pet members of Congress to sign yet another disingenuous letter, this time sponsored by Rep. Gene Green (D-ATT).

This time, AT&T is claiming that consumer protection, Universal Service and other items the government needs to do to help people are simply a "distraction." Once again, they threaten the future of investment if the FCC goes forward. The investment issue was so important, the mentioned it twice to make sure the message got through, to frighten Genachowski once again.

So far, AT&T is gaining signatories of members of Congress willing to betray their constituencies and ignore the falsehoods. The investment/jobs argument is particularly cynical. AT&T and Verizon have cut tens of thousands of jobs over the past couple of years in which the regulatory climate has been most favorable to them. Verizon has stopped its fiber build out, not because of any regulation, but because it wanted to.

Fred Wilson, one of our country's premier venture capitalists, supports the FCC. He's at the heart of Silicon Alley, one of the hottest creative areas around.

So why are the members of Congress signing onto this misleading letter, and why is the FCC quaking in its boots again? Look at all the pressure money can buy. AT&T spent $5.9 million in the first quarter of this year. That's almost double from the fourth quarter last year. Verizon spent $4.7 million in the first quarter this year on lobbying.That's up from $3.2 million in the fourth quarter.

And big, bad Google? They spent a little more than $1 million. Do the math, and don't wonder why it is all those members of Congress are signing onto nonsensical letters. Those figures are only for the telephone/broadband companies. Their wireless affiliates spent millions more.

Want some more math? Look at the top Political Action Committee. There's a reason AT&T splits its dough between the parties - so they can buy Democrats who will abandon their constituents and the Obama Administration's forward-looking tech policies.

Message to the FCC: You have seen this before and you know the score. It doesn't matter how many Democrats sign these put-up letters. You are doing the right thing. Stay strong. This rerun is as meaningless now as it was during the first showing.

 

Follow Art Brodsky on Twitter: www.twitter.com/artbrodsky

 
 
  • Comments
  • 8
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
K377
09:06 AM on 06/01/2010
The fact remains that the government cannot support the type of investment in infrastructure that private companies have invested. Asking the Commission to consider the “full range of potential consequences” is not a threat; it is something the government should be doing in every instance of rulemaking. The FCC should examine the impact that its rules will have on investment and how that, in turn, will affect consumers and businesses that are dependent on the infrastructure.
09:11 AM on 05/29/2010
Buying Congress is no big news. But super-companies buying the internet is. Yes, the FCC managed to fight off the lobbyists last time. But can it do it again? With the increasingly fast pace of basic communications and the failing of newspapers, swift internet access is essential for all citizens, not just those in cities. When the telephone came on the scene, the government ultimately required access to rural areas. Access to the full range of internet products is vital to all people, even if it takes a bureaucracy to insure it. We can’t turn over the rulemaking to those who make the profits from them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeneba Speaks
02:55 PM on 05/25/2010
After reading this post, I am reminded of how policy advocates often times can become disconnected from the real and practical impact of the rhetoric they espouse. I speak from the perspectives of someone on the ground and who communicates and engages with several constituent groups grasping for the FCC’s attention on a myriad of access, connectivity, and other issues. The Net Neutrality debate has succeeded in eclipsing all other policy initiatives. Can you not see what a distraction this issue truly is, especially considering that the harm to be redressed is hypothetical and not widespread? Meanwhile, real people with real issues and concerns are being ignored.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mister Biggles
06:35 AM on 05/21/2010
Take any and all broadband lines via eminent domain for the public good.

The idea of a private company owning something as important as the public "information superhighway" is as ludicrous as a private company owning our roads.

...oh wait...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:43 PM on 05/20/2010
This issue is crazy making. I get EXPENSIVE adds mailed to me every week from Qwest. They do not provide DSL to my area. ATT does not have cell service in my area. NO Cell service from any provider.
No cable either. Surrounded by 500K + homes we have Dial UP at 26.4 kps MAX. and beer. It's the Ludite capitol of the pucker brush. I know what your asking, is it Bud?
02:19 AM on 05/21/2010
satellite provides high speed internet - no phone line required. why dont you choose that? or even cable high speed internet. is that not available?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
edejan
07:23 PM on 05/20/2010
Do we need another storm of emails and petitions from the American people to the FCC and our representatives to ensure that Genachoski doesn't quietly cave while the media is not watching? Thank you for keeping us updated on this most important and urgent issue!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:15 AM on 05/21/2010
Without question. Our representatives need to know we are watching, and it can't hurt the FCC to know that they are supported in this.