Kevin Kayes, Democratic staffer for Senate Commerce Committee, sa...

its rules every 2 years was taxing to it and destabilizing on market (CD Jan 27 p1). Speaking Wed. at Comnet regulatory town meeting in Washington, Kayes, staffer to Sen. Hollings (D-S.C.) cited Powell’s interest in changes in frequency of biennial review: “That was a positive statement and that’s great as far as it goes. But I think we also have to have a federal regulatory scheme that doesn’t anticipate these huge changes in the way we deal with industry.” Broadband proceeding at FCC that will redefine what information technology is “has put everything into flux,” Kayes said. “Just by virtue of proposing such a dramatic change in the regulatory scheme it has turned the [Telecom] Act on top of its head… Let Congress make those macro decisions and I would hope the FCC would work in that framework to help interpret and advance those principles.” As part of discussion on effectiveness of Telecom Act, Bryan Tramont, aide to Powell, responded that uncertainty “hasn’t been created by the regulatory regime.” Twice FCC has tried -- and failed -- to adopt “a judicially sustainable view” of UNEs, Tramont said: “Having rules out there that aren’t sustained in courts creates more uncertainty. This Commission is dedicated to passing rules in these proceedings that will be sustained.” On definition of information service, there’s need to resolve that question, he said. “To the extent that the Hill weighs in and resolves that question for us, certainly we would welcome that,” Tramont said. In FCC’s UNE Triennial Review proceeding, NARUC Gen. Counsel Brad Ramsay said question of state involvement involved what role states would play. “Earlier in the debate the question was, will the states be playing a role,” he said. “Now the debate has shifted to what role will we take when the [UNE] platform leaves a particular market.” Kayes cited recent Senate Commerce Committee hearing at which Powell said complete preemption of states wasn’t issue in Triennial Review, saying there would be role for both state and federal regulators (CD Jan 15 p1). “What our committee said in a real strong way… was we're at a point where the states ought to be making these decisions.” Hope is that much of decisions on UNE-related policy will be left to state level, Kayes said. Washington attorney Richard Wiley, who moderated panel, asked NTIA Deputy Dir. Michael Gallagher: “Given how important this is, why hasn’t the Administration taken a position on the whole broadband issue to date?” Gallagher disagreed with characterization, saying President Bush twice had spoken publicly on issue. “He’s been very clear that it’s a positive social development, a positive social technology,” Gallagher said. “We see the broadband question as being much broader than one rulemaking.” Among examples of Administration’s attention to issue was infrastructure investment, which was covered in last year’s stimulus package in which several different depreciation tables were reconciled, he said.