Advancing Consumer Interests Through Ubiquitous Broadband: The Need for a New Spectrum

I. INTRODUCTION II. UBIQUITOUS BROADBAND PENETRATION MUST BE OUR HIGHEST PRIORITY AND SPECTRUM REFORM IS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THAT GOAL III. IMPROVING FEDERAL SPECTRUM POLICY IV. NETWORK NEUTRALITY REGULATION: SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM? V. CONCLUSION I. INTRODUCTION Consumers benefit when they have a choice among competing providers. Rival services have a vested interest and need to innovate and differentiate their services to provide new and improved services to consumers. This is not a groundbreaking economic theory, but rather the fundamental building block for my regulatory philosophy. My role as FCC Commissioner is to encourage competition and investment, and ensure that both incumbent and new providers have the tools to innovate on behalf of consumers. A thriving market with competitive options will always regulate economic behavior better and more efficiently than government intervention, particularly in times of rapid technological change. Developing a vibrant broadband marketplace that is available to all Americans lies at the heart of the FCC's work to establish a national broadband plan as directed by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). (1) It is a monumental challenge shaping much of the FCC's work in 2009 and will continue to dominate our agenda as we work to deliver our plan to Congress by the February 2010 deadline. (2) To design a national broadband plan is an unprecedented task that requires a wide-ranging examination of a variety of fronts including universal service and intercarrier compensation reform, special access policy, tax and investment incentives, consumer education, and adoption. These are all significant issues and our conversations about them in this context are important. As our record emerges, it is clear that the overarching FCC objective of ubiquitous nationwide broadband networks--making sure that networks are accessible to all Americans--cannot be accomplished without significant and timely action on spectrum policy. Three key components of spectrum reform needed to foster greater broadband access. First, we need to grant access to spectrum resources ready for allocation and use. Second, we need to rethink how we use existing spectrum resources, and whether there are more efficient means to use this finite resource through reallocation or sharing. Third, we need to ensure that our regulatory framework promotes innovative uses and investment in the spectrum resources on hand. In this Issue, and over the coming months, the Federal Communications Law Journal will focus substantial attention to the concept of network neutrality. It is an important editorial exercise. There is much discussion about even the basic elements of proposed regulatory approaches, including the need for network neutrality regulation, the desired scope of any such rules, and the risks posed to investment and innovation from a new regulatory regime. While no panacea, spectrum policy can play an important role in addressing the flashpoints in the network neutrality debate by providing greater capacity to existing and evolving networks, unlocking new competitors to challenge existing providers, and offering opportunities for new innovative applications and devices. The articles in this Issue ask critical questions about the government's role in broadband and whether the government is best equipped to address all of the associated challenges. They are helpful and cautionary lessons. I hope the broadband debate will be lively and informative, and I appreciate the Journal's important contribution. II. UBIQUITOUS BROADBAND PENETRATION MUST BE OUR HIGHEST PRIORITY AND SPECTRUM REFORM IS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THAT GOAL Policymakers have long understood the impact that they can have on broadband deployments. The Clinton Administration proposed that the private sector take a lead role in developing commercial applications for the Internet. …