Communications Act Update: In Rewriting An Outdated Law, Consider Advancements in Technology

There are times when current law just can’t keep up with realities on the ground, when it comes to the Communications Act that was last updated in 1996, this is clearly the case. As technology has become more and more advanced for the last few decades, there remains little doubt that an overhaul is needed for the current rules in place. Late last year, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) announced plans to update the Communications Act and while they are taking the time to examine the law and ways to update it, they have also asked for input from anyone who has an interest. With that in mind, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance submitted the following remarks to those who are working on this effort.

Communications Act Update: Statement from the Taxpayers Protection Alliance to the House Energy and Commerce Committee

January 2014

The Taxpayers Protection Alliance (TPA) believes that the Communications Act is woefully outdated and is substandard in its ability to provide the right guidelines for today’s current digital landscape. We thank House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) for allowing TPA to comment on how a Communications Act update will be in the best interest of taxpayers, consumers, and businesses.

The manner in which the Communications Act is updated will have a lasting effect on consumers, taxpayers, and the regulatory bodies that oversee the process. Any update should take into account all the advancements in the technological arena over the last twenty years, while ensuring that the current rules in place that hinder innovation and discourage entrepreneurs are eliminated. Former Federal Communications Commissioner (FCC) Commissioner Michael Powell noted in testimony before the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Committee on Energy and Commerce that, “There is a serious threat to innovation and competition when the law confers any regulatory advantage on particular technologies, or deregulates not when market forces warrant, but when a favored technology is used. Companies facing fierce competition will respond to what consumers want, as providers continuously seek to differentiate themselves and their products and services. Their response should not be driven, or even affected, by a need to fit a service into a particular regulatory box. A regulatory scheme that successfully encourages innovation will not require providers to spend time debating which side of the line a service feature puts them on.”

Retransmission consent is one area where the need for a rewrite to the act can be recognized by even the most casual observer. Current rules for retransmission consent grant an inherit advantage to broadcasters by providing leverage in negotiations with monopoly cable providers and granting broadcasters the right to choose between guaranteed carriage or insisting that multichannel video programming distributors (cable and satellite providers) obtain and pay for a station’s consent to retransmit the station to local subscribers.

Any update to the Communications Act should not be used as a vehicle for increasing the power and influence of the FCC over any specific industry. A bipartisan process is the best way to ensure that an update to the Communications Act will be revised in a manner similar to reforms when it was last updated nearly twenty years ago. Finally, the need for updating the Communications Act must be done in an earnest fashion. There is no need for window dressing and meaningless reforms just to say the law was updated.

Lawmakers must come together on issues including retransmission, silos, consumer industry effects, and many others. As technology has become more and more advanced during the last few decades, there remains little doubt that an overhaul is needed for the current rules in place in the Communications Act. The government shouldn’t be in the business of picking and choosing winners when it comes to any industry. The time for action is now and with momentum building for a comprehensive update to the Communications Act, TPA is looking forward to contributing to the debate as the process moves forward.