In the federal government, regulators are not directly accountable to the electorate. While an elected official must account at every election for their actions, typically regulators, such as FCC commissioners, are appointed by elected officials and hence do not answer directly to the people.
This simple fact may explain the FCC’s seeming determination to assert increased government control of the Internet, or at least the belief by pro-government control activists that the FCC deliver their agenda on a silver platter.
Years ago, the FCC determined broadband would be regulated as an “information service” rather than a “telecommunications service.” So, the FCC decided, and later the Supreme Court agreed, that broadband is not to be burdened with antiquated “common carrier” regulations, rules created in 1934 to impose heavy government control of the then monopoly telephone system. In fact, right now the federal courts are deciding whether the FCC has any authority over broadband at all.
So why would anyone, much less the FCC, want to impose stifling regulation on perhaps the only growing industry left in America?
To put government in control of data networks would be to put government in control of perhaps the most important part of the economy—communications. The attempt here is not to simply have government act as traffic cops for calls routed over systems in a monopoly environment—no, this move would allow government to know all we do and have the power to limit or stop it. This is a wholesale attempt to convince the FCC to backpedal on the progress of the last decade, to fly in the face of the Supreme Court and to take control of the Internet.
As has already been witnessed both nationally and in the states, with such control also comes a hesitancy to invest, and in this case particularly so because of the immediate legal confusion that will follow—an FCC reversal and the inevitable wait for Supreme Court review….again.
Given all of the negatives, the only explanation is an ideological rather than pragmatic agenda is being pursued at the FCC. It is the height of arrogance, sacrificing everything to achieve government control of broadband.
There is logical reason to go back to revisit old debates and reverse working policy structures. Technology is virtually synonymous with forward thinking, so let’s keep looking forward.