Former FCC Chiefs Hopeful on Infrastructure Bill but Say Closing Divide Won't Be Easy
Former FCC chairs said addressing the digital divide won’t be easy, even with infrastructure legislation before Congress, during a Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council webinar Monday. A pending bipartisan proposal includes $65 billion for broadband (see 2107150046).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Former Chairman William Kennard said the divide will never go away entirely because networks and technology change. “Some people get access to the newest and the fastest before the others,” he said. The problem now is that many Americans don’t have even basic broadband and the COVID-19 pandemic “exposed” that, he said. “It was heart-wrenching to see 17 million schoolchildren unable to work from home because they didn’t have access to technology to do that,” he said.
Kennard sees bipartisan support for “major funding” for broadband networks. The level of funding being discussed would be “unprecedented” and a “real game changer,” he said: “Like everything else in Washington, it’s not done until it’s done.”
“There’s no single or even single-digit reason why [the divide] exists,” former acting Chairwoman Mignon Clyburn said. Part of the problem is the FCC works in “silos,” she said. “We’ve got a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and we’re debating, in some cases, … the small stuff,” she said: “We need to think big, we need to think bold.” Wireless, wired and satellite all have a role to play, she said.
Even with infrastructure, some will need “digital education” on how to use digital tools, said former Chairman Richard Wiley. “A cellphone isn’t going to do it all the time for many of the uses that people need,” he said.
“There are some parts of the country where networks exist, but they’re simply not affordable,” said former Chairman Ajit Pai: “It’s not a Republican or a Democratic issue.” Wireless has to be “part of the equation” and so does making more spectrum available for 5G, he said: “The last thing we want is to create some 5G haves and have-nots.”
The former chairs disagreed on the advisability of a shot clock or other rules requiring prompt FCC decision-making, though they agreed speed counts.
Pai recalled a filing during his early days as a commissioner: One party said “tell me yes, tell me no, just tell me something because I need to have some certainty.” Pai’s “one regret” is he didn’t have time to develop a plan for the FCC's future, “reimagining the agency,” getting rid of silos “and focusing on the core functions.” Doing so would be a big logistical and political challenge, he said.
Wiley said the day he became chairman he called all the bureau and office chiefs into his office and asked for a list of every item more than a year old, so he could draw up a timeline for action. “A lot of industries get very frustrated with regulatory delay,” he said. But some matters are more complex than others and a shot clock might not work, he said. With Democrats and Republicans working together to make decisions, the FCC model has “worked very well for the country,” he said.
The agency has to “impose discipline on itself,” said Kennard, noting he created the initial shot clock for merger reviews. As a former FCC general counsel, he worries a shot clock “would put enormous pressure on the General Counsel’s Office.”
Clyburn said she looked at items “big and small” to close out. “That was a very deliberate plan … with the mindset that we might not be talking about the biggest issues or dockets, but we’re talking about dockets that meant something to someone but were languishing,” she said: “There are some things that are more complex than others.”