MCA on the social web
Act Now.
Enter your contact info.
If you would like to support us, please click below.
Contributions are not tax deductible.
National Broadband Plan
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently released their much ballyhooed National Broadband Plan
The plan outlines the following six goals which the FCC hopes to achieve moving forward:
• Goal 1: At least 100 million U.S. homes should have affordable access to actual download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second and actual upload speeds of at least 50 megabits per second.
• Goal 2: The United States should lead the world in mobile innovation, with the fastest and most extensive wireless networks of any nation.
• Goal 3: Every American should have affordable access to robust broadband service, and the means and skills to subscribe if they so choose.
• Goal 4: Every community should have affordable access to at least 1 Gbps broadband service to anchor institutions such as schools, hospitals and government buildings.
• Goal 5: To ensure the safety of Americans, every first responder should have access to a nationwide public safety wireless network.
• Goal 6: To ensure that America leads in the clean energy economy, every American should be able to use broadband to track and manage their real-time energy consumption.
After releasing the plan, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski sat down with PBS’ News Hour for an interview on the sweeping plan.
Initial reaction from some of the country’s largest broadband providers seemed cautious during a policy event at the National Press Club.
An editorial in the Washington Post found the FCC’s plan to be a bit more dubious and questioned whether government involvement in the Internet space is even necessary.
The next steps for the FCC plan will most certainly require Congressional action. Here’s an informative edition of C-SPAN’s The Communicators which explores what role Congress will have in the implementation of the plan.
Don't Let The Government LOCKDOWN The Internet
In a landmark court decision handed down on April 6, 2010, a Federal appeals court ruled for Comcast and against the FCC on key Net Neutrality case
According to the above press report, the “unanimous ruling by the three-judge panel was a setback for the FCC because it questioned the agency’s authority to regulate broadband. That could cause problems beyond the FCC’s effort to adopt official net neutrality regulations. It also has serious implications for the ambitious national broadband-expansion plan released by the FCC last month. The FCC needs the authority to regulate broadband so that it can push ahead with some of the plan’s key recommendations.”
In a radio interview on NPR’s Marketplace the day the court’s Comcast decision was released, Cecilia Kang, technology reporter for the Washington Post, discussed the consumer implications of the court’s decision and its effects on the FCC’s National Broadband Plan.
And in an article entitled, “Net Neutrality is Anti-Consumer,” the editors of the_National Review_ offered up a very thorough piece of analysis regarding the court’s Comcast ruling, explaining why efforts toward government regulation of the Internet will not benefit consumers. In order to overcome their loss in the courts, the National Review editors report that, “Net-neutrality backers, of whom FCC chairman Julius Genachowski is one, have suggested that the FCC should reclassify the Internet as a ‘telecommunications service’ rather than an ‘information service’ in order to gain the regulatory authority it currently lacks.”
Reclassification of the Internet under the FCC’s Title II provisions, however, presents its own set of problems for the Commission. Not only is reclassification legally questionable, but it would almost certainly put the brakes on innovation and future network investment in the Internet.
The FCC could continue to attempt to gain regulatory control of the Internet through reclassification and/or ask Congress to pass statutory changes which grant the Commission that authority, but that could end up being a case study in throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
The existing regulatory environment for the Internet has been working – innovation and new technology has flourished. Private investment coupled with entrepreneurial spirit has created a booming Internet industry – a success story in an otherwise troubled economy.
MCA believes that the FCC’S goal of seeking to connect all of America to the promise of high-speed Internet is a good one. But public policies and regulatory structures that distract from that goal could be barriers to future innovation, instead of encouraging and enabling more competition and increased access to the Internet.
Additional Information on Net Neutrality
Press release from the Institute for Policy Innovation opposing net neutrality regulations
Is the FCC neutralizing innovation?
Network neutrality? How about FCC neutrality?
You Axed the Wireless Tax!
On March 11, after weeks of getting bombarded by thousands of letters, phone calls, and e-mails from Oklahoma consumers, the Commission unanimously voted to postpone consideration of the statewide toll-free calling plan. The vote effectively “Axes the Wireless Tax” for now. MCA supporters who contacted the Commission deserve full credit for helping the Commissioners realize the proposal needed to be more carefully examined. Congratulations for making sure your voices were heard!
Axe the Wireless Tax Campaign Timeline
In mid January, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC), the state agency tasked with regulating utilities across the state, began a process to study whether a statewide toll-free calling area would be a good idea.
After the process began, The Oklahoman ran an article about the proposal that looked at arguments both for and against the plan. The next day, the Tulsa World ran an editorial which pointed out that the OCC’s “toll-free” plan would not really be free – after all, someone would have to pay for it, right?
Soon after, The Oklahoman reported what the Tulsa World editorial writers had already guessed – that the plan would cost consumers roughly $2.00 per month per line in additional fees. This new fee would be for ALL phone lines, regardless of whether they are landlines, cellular lines, or Internet phone lines. The $2.00 figure was only an initial estimate from the OCC staff, which meant the additional monthly fees could end up being even higher.
Well, it didn’t take long for the Commission staff to revise their initial estimate. On February 22nd, Commission staff released a supplemental economic analysis which showed a new estimate of $3.19 per month per line, which was quickly reported by The Oklahoman.
The media initially reported that the OCC had until April 1st to send their proposal to the state legislature. Once it became clear that the OCC plan was a serious possibility, opinions started rolling in about whether statewide toll-free calling made sense for Oklahoma consumers.
Leading off those opinions was the Hughes County Times in Wetumka, (PDF file), and it wasn’t good news for the OCC’s plan.
On February 19th, Mid-American Communications Alliance filed an official comment with the Commission opposing the plan and began a statewide grassroots effort to convince the OCC to scrap the proposal.
On February 24th, the Tulsa World published an editorial publicly opposing the Commission plan, calling the proposal a “waste of time” and “a bad deal for most telephone users in Oklahoma.”
On February 25th, the Oologah Lake Leader published an editorial in opposition of the OCC proposal, (PDF file) calling the plan “a child of Satan that should be strangled in its cradle before it can get any bigger and cause Oklahoma irreparable harm.”
On February 26th, The Oklahoman, the state’s largest newspaper, published an editorial opposing a statewide toll-free calling plan and urging the Commission to “hang up on this idea.”
On March 4th, The Oklahoman reported that debate surrounding the OCC proposal was raging and that there were questions about whether the Commission even had the legal jurisdiction to implement the plan.
On March 5th, the Tulsa World published a letter to the editor from MCA’s Executive Director urging the Commission to scrap the toll-free calling plan.
On March 11, after weeks of being inundated by thousands of letters, phone calls, and e-mails from MCA supporters and other Oklahoma consumers, the Commission unanimously voted to postpone consideration of the statewide toll-free calling plan. The vote effectively “Axed the Wireless Tax,” putting the brakes on a rushed and ill-conceived proposal.
Axe the Wireless Tax
FCC Votes to Move Net Neutrality Rules Forward
In a 3-2 vote along party lines, the Federal Communications Commission began moving forward with open-Internet regulations.
The FCC proceeding to consider net neutrality rules is the culmination of contentious lobbying by the telecom industry and an intense exchange of letters from members of Congress.
With Thursday’s vote, the five-member panel began the process to move forward with open-Internet regulations announced last month by the agency’s chairman, Juilus Genachowski. His proposal would formally codify the FCC’s four principles intended to prevent Internet service providers from giving preferential treatment to certain content and services and therefore deciding which applications consumers have access to. He also proposed two additional principles, one to ensure providers do not discriminate between applications and another to require Internet companies to disclose their network management practices to consumers.
Genachowski had the full support of Democratic Commissioners Micheal Copps and Mignon Clyburn, as expected. Republican Commissioners Robert McDowell and Meredith Atwell Baker dissented on the idea that government regulation is needed to keep the Internet open, but supported the beginning of a fact-finding process to learn more about the technical and legal questions surrounding net neutrality.
UCLA Study: Elderly Can Benefit from Internet Usage
Adults with little Internet experience show changes in their brain activity after just one week online, a new study finds.
The results suggest Internet training can stimulate neural activation patterns and could potentially enhance brain function and cognition in older adults.
As the brain ages, a number of structural and functional changes occur, including atrophy, or decay, reductions in cell activity and increases in complex things like deposits of amyloid plaques and tau tangles, which can impact cognitive function.
Research has shown that mental stimulation similar to the stimulation that occurs in individuals who frequently use the Internet may affect the efficiency of cognitive processing and alter the way the brain encodes new information.
Just days before its possible October 22 vote on new “net neutrality” regulations, the Federal Communications Commission is being bombarded with messages from high-ranking elected officials telling the commissioners to tone it down.
The messages, from both Republicans and a surprisingly high number of Democrats, seek to persuade the FCC commissioners to slow down and take a deep breath before placing oppressive regulations on an Internet industry that has brought innovation and investment to communities across America.
As the Wall Street Journal reported:
At last count, there have been 11 letters from governors (a mix of Republicans and Democrats), 18 Republican Senators, House minority leadership and now, the 72 House Democrats, which includes 18 members of the Congressional Black Caucus, 31 Blue Dog Democrats and 10 members of the House Energy & Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over the FCC.
In the letter signed by 72 House Democrats, the lawmakers conclude, “In light of the growth and innovation in new applications that the current regime has enabled, as compared to the limited evidence demonstrating any tangible harm, we would urge you to avoid any tentative conclusions which favor government regulation.”
Of the 72 House Democrats signing the letter, six are from states where MCA operates:
Arkansas
Rep. Mike Ross
Kansas
Rep. Dennis Moore
Missouri
Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay
Rep. Russ Carnahan
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver
Oklahoma
Rep. Dan Boren
These six account for two-thirds of all House Democrat members from the MCA states.
And anytime 72 Democrat Members of the U.S. House of Representatives agree that increased regulation is bad, people should take notice. In this case, the people taking notice should be the FCC commissioners.
The big question is why are so many lawmakers from both sides of the aisle coming to the conclusion that “net neutrality” regulations would be harmful? Here are several reasons:
1. Competition and innovation are thriving without burdensome regulations
As MCA pointed out in this opinion piece, competition in the wireless market has benefitted millions of consumers by providing more choice, more innovation, and the lowest cost in the world for wireless service. Americans use their wireless devices more than the citizens of any other country because a light regulatory structure has allowed competition to thrive. There is no reason for the FCC to fix something that isn’t broken.
2. Network investment will suffer if “net neutrality” regulations are imposed by the FCC.
As House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, and House Republican whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., recently wrote in a letter to President Obama, “We believe that network neutrality regulations would actually thwart further broadband investment and availability, and that a well-reasoned broadband plan would confirm our view,” Boehner and Cantor concluded, “So to hastily begin the process of adopting network neutrality rules months before issuing such a plan implies that politics are driving the FCC’s decision-making process.”
3. The Internet must remain free to be an economic driver for the U.S. economy.
“As Americans wade through the current economic situation, a decision by the FCC to discourage broadband investment would be irresponsible,” Boehner and Cantor wrote. “The United States needs broadband providers to increase investment and create jobs. This will not occur if broadband providers are saddled with unnecessary, burdensome requirements that interfere with their ability to manage their networks and create innovative broadband products that maximize consumer choice and benefit.”
4. Proposed “net neutrality” regulations would hamper President Obama’s goal of universal broadband access and threaten minority communities.
In a recent letter to FCC commissioners, numerous minority groups including the NAACP, the League of United Latin American Citizens, and the National Disability Institute argued that imposing new rules on Internet traffic could impede Obama’s goal of 100% broadband access for America. The groups stated, “As organizations that serve communities that are among the most severely impacted by a lack of access to technology, we urge you to keep your number one focus on the need to get everyone connected. We are concerned that some of the proposed regulations on the Internet could, as applied, inhibit the goal of universal access and leave disenfranchised communities further behind. We are also concerned that some proposed regulations could inhibit investments being made by companies employing hundreds of thousands of workers and connecting millions to the opportunities that broadband technology affords to those in our community – from telemedicine to distance learning to applying for jobs online.”
But if the flood of bipartisan objections to the their proposed “net neutrality” rules isn’t enough for the FCC commissioners, now members of the general public can voice their opposition to the proposed regulations as well.
If you agree with these bipartisan groups and numerous Republican and Democrat lawmakers that “net neutrality” regulations would be bad for America, MCA urges you to click this link to post on the FCC’s blog and let them know how you feel.
Also, feel free to leave a comment here in our blog!
Union Tells FCC ‘Net Neutrality’ Rule May Squelch Investment
The Communications Workers of America, a union with workers at AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc., urged U.S. regulators to protect investment and job creation as they craft rules on Internet competition.
“We depend on private capital” to invest in networks, Larry Cohen, president of the union, said in a letter today to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski. The union distributed the letter by e-mail.
The Communications Workers joins AT&T, Verizon and Comcast Corp. in expressing concern after Genachowski said last month that he wanted “net neutrality” rules to prevent companies from favoring some content providers over others. The companies have said the rules aren’t necessary and may hinder their ability to manage their networks.
Debate rages about whether government-based Internet regulations would benefit consumers
On September 21st, Julius Genachowski, the newly appointed chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, gave a speech at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. that outlined his reasoning for pursuing new “net neutrality” regulations. Since Genachowski’s speech, a heated debate has taken place throughout the country regarding whether or not possible new regulations are necessary and would ultimately benefit consumers.
On one side, net neutrality proponents argue that government regulation of the Internet is needed to keep networks open and unrestricted. On the other hand, opponents of net neutrality regulations argue that government intervention is unnecessary and will significantly diminish future innovation and private network investment.
How this issue is ultimately decided will most certainly have a profound impact on how the Internet continues to evolve over time. Over the next several months, MCA will offer its take on possible net neutrality regulations, but initially we want to provide our supporters with the arguments on both sides of the issue. Below are several takes on net neutrality that serve as a primer for what should be a contentious debate for some time to come.
Text of Chairman Genachowski’s speech at Brookings
Press release from the Institute for Policy Innovation opposing net neutrality regulations
FCC ‘Net Neutrality’ Rules Are a Win for Consumers
Wireless Experts Predict FCC’s ‘Net Neutrality’ Rule’s Impact on Mobile Operators
Is the FCC neutralizing innovation?
Network neutrality? How about FCC neutrality?
New Report on Mobile Broadband Access among Hispanics
The U.S. Hispanic population now tops 48 million. And while Hispanics as a group lag other populations in terms of overall Internet access, they are near the top in mobile broadband usage.
A new report by Mobile Future and The Hispanic Institute offers a look into Hispanic broadband access and details how a national broadband strategy could most benefit Hispanics in the U.S.
Click here to read a brief overview of the report. PDF versions of the full report are available via that link in both English and Spanish.
