Even though publications issued without a vote of the FCC s members have no legal or precedential significance, cable industry lobbyists can misuse such documents in municipal and state legislative battles. The foundation of our democratic form of governance is open decision making, following public scrutiny and robust debate. Such openness benefits everyone by ensuring fairness and guaranteeing that the policies selected can withstand the most penetrating and withering challenges. Secrecy, on the other hand, engenders only suspicion and doubt.
Secrecy also generates bad policy.
It is sadly ironic that the Commission should proceed in secret to prepare a document purporting to provide guidance on an issue of such national importance. As far as we are aware, public input on this report came from three invitation-only meetings with staff. These meetings, we were assured, marked the beginning of an extended process. Several months later, apparently without any further public input, the Commission produces a document purporting to guide the local franchising authorities. Our deep concern is exacerbated by the fact that the Commission and its staff have been unwilling even to discuss consumer and civil liberties groups sincere and carefully documented policy arguments against use of the cable TV model for Internet access.