FCC/Congress; rules/no rules
I've spent a couple of years now chasing down FCC initiatives having to do with the internet, and generally despairing that the Commission can be relied on to do the sensible thing. And I've often suggested that the sensible thing would be to do nothing.
Now, in the substrate neutrality debate (still looking for a better term — maybe we should give up and go back to “information superhighway” ideas — how about “open roads”?) I've come to believe that someone, some government actor, has to get involved. This is a big shift, and it's happening (for me, at least) because there isn't any real competition in the market for unfettered internet access. Indeed, there's no competition at all in that marketplace. All the big guys believe that they should own and control and prioritize.
This doesn't mean that I've given up on worrying about the FCC and its abilities. If it is going to become the “internet agency,” and if it's going to be our place for open road rules, the Commission needs to change. It's going to need to pay higher salaries so that more technical people go there. It's going to need to allow the staff to do good work without fearing political overruling at the top. It can't be a backwater — it will have to be a great and innovative place to work.
Worrying about the FCC has always put us in the position of saying Go to Congress — they'll get it right! But, of course, there's no assurance that they will. As William Blackstone put it centuries ago:
Indeed it is really amazing, that there should be no other state of life, no other occupation, art, or science, in which some method of instruction is not looked upon as requisite, except only the science of legislation, the noblest and most difficult of any. Apprenticeships are held necessary to almost every art, commmercial or mechanical: a long course of reading and study must form the divine, the physcian, and the practical professor of the laws; but every man of superior fortune thinks himself born a legislator.
It's important to remain optimistic, and I'm doing that, but it's hard to see how either the current Commission or current Congress will accomplish what's needed. Maybe the current Administration's swamp-level approval ratings are signaling a desire for change.
Comments
3 Responses to “FCC/Congress; rules/no rules”
Got something to say?
I share your general mistrust of Congress on this issue. If anything, they can be relied upon to do the wrong thing, in my view. Or at least they can be relied upon to represent any interest but the voters'.
For me, I would need to see evidence that Congressional intervention is necessary. To date, there have been few, if any instance of abuse of the system. Until we see a systematic attempt to exploit the rules, I think we should give the benefit of the doubt to free market mechanisms.
How exactly can one put there trust in Congress to establish net neutrality? Even should they pass laws concerning it they would be vague and ineffective as the subject is fluid and legislating on it is near impossible. Furthermore, to inforce any law they would have to turn it over to an executive agency like the FCC, thus retruning to your original problem. I say keep the government out and let the free-market and consumers influence policy.
To protect consumers, I'll take the FCC + the open market over congressional regulation any day!