POWELL BIDS STATES BECOME POLICY ‘AMBASSADORS’ FOR BROADBAND
PHILADELPHIA -- FCC Chmn. Powell told state regulatory commission members here that they should view themselves as “ambassadors” of broadband rather than just its regulators if they wanted to have influence over how broadband service developed. Powell, keynote speaker at closing session of NARUC annual convention Wed., said broadband was “more than just a pipe. It’s a synthesis of communications power and computer power with content and applications. You must take a holistic approach to broadband. No one government entity has control over all 3 elements, but without all 3 elements, broadband is nothing.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Powell urged states to “dedicate policy resources specifically to broadband,” asking “how many of you have a state office of broadband policy?” Only few state hands went up. “We [FCC] are ready to make some changes in this area.” In response to questions later, Powell said organizational form of FCC broadband policy entity hadn’t been determined, but its function would be “a one-stop coordinating point so our left hand always knows what our right hand is doing” with regard to broadband. He said each of FCC’s bureaus and divisions had piece of broadband pie but there had been no single point of policy contact that crossed bureau boundaries.
FCC broadband focus is on availability, not subscribership, Powell said. “Customer take rates are a matter for the markets, not for regulation.” He said most effective role for govt. regulators in broadband development was as “manager of the legal relationships. Here is where we have the most direct influence, addressing the legal impediments to broadband infrastructure development” such as building access, local zoning and right-of-way management. He said any regulatory approaches to broadband development “must be platform agnostic to avoid embedding an inferior technology” just because that’s what was available today. He said there always must be path for technology migration. Broadband “won’t be DSL alone or for long. It'll be satellite and cable and wireless and maybe even the electric grid.” Having multiple broadband technologies, he said, “avoids the morass of essential-facility regulation.”
Powell said “regulatory creep” and excessive intervention must be avoided. “We are used to regulating mature technologies with few unexpected surprises, not new technology that’s still in its infancy,” he said. Regulators, he said, must learn about innovation because broadband “is a paint box capable of a myriad of colors. We need to allow experimentation.” State govt., he said, “must conceptualize broadband broadly because many of its components are outside PUC regulatory purview but are part of the broadband equation” such as cable modems, wireless and satellite services and content providers.
Urging state commissions to work with their legislatures and local govt. authorities to address broadband impediments, Powell said they also should keep track of broadband availability and demand and sponsor public/private partnerships for broadband development as well as dedicating policy resources to broadband. He said states “need to see broadband not as a public utility matter but as an economic development matter. You need to be the ambassadors of broadband, not just its regulators. With broadband, it won’t be enough to just ’think outside the box.’ You'll have to climb completely out of the box.”
After Powell spoke, panel of state regulators addressed some of broadband issues Powell raised. Mich. PSC Comr. David Svanda said localities had legitimate interests to safeguard with respect to broadband, “but they must also subscribe to the national broadband vision” and not just tend to their parochial interests. Svanda said Mich. had seen some of worst examples of local parochialism impeding telecom development but also some examples of govt. enlightenment. He also said he would prefer to “watch from a distance” and not intervene as long as broadband developed within a free marketplace. “But if it’s just the incumbent offering another new service in the same old way, that’s different.”
Alaska Regulatory Comr. Nan Thompson said broadband delivery systems no longer were central issue in debates. “It’s no longer a technology question, it’s now an economics problem.” Comr. Diane Munns of Ia. Utility Board said any activity that encouraged broadband deployment carried risk of “embedding technological inferiority” because systems could be superseded by newer technologies “the day you put them in, but you have to build something sometime.” Munns said Iowa had public/private broadband ‘alliance” associated with governor’s office that was addressing policy issues.
Powell Urges Action on NextWave Settlement
Questioned by reporters during his appearance at NARUC, Powell warned that time was running short for reaching settlement in NextWave dispute. “If people really want the settlement -- I mean parties, the Congress and the government -- now is the time,” he said, according to Reuters. Congress is slated to adjourn by mid-Dec. and time is needed for writing settlement into law, he said: “They owe Congress an opportunity to pass on this and it needs to happen very soon or there’s not going to be a really good prospect of getting congressional approval.”