Government Watchdog Group Slams FCC Plan for Digital Discrimination Rules

Taxpayers Protection Alliance

October 25, 2023

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 25, 2023      
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
Contact: Kara Zupkus
224-456-0257
 
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel announced on Tuesday a proposal for strong digital discrimination rules to be voted on at the commission’s November 15 meeting.
 
In the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, Congress charged the FCC with establishing rules to prevent “digital discrimination of access based on income level, race, ethnicity, color, religion, or national origin.”
 
While it is important that providers do not discriminate against legally protected groups, Rosenworcel’s proposal goes too far in using the disparate impact standard that holds providers accountable for unintentional actions that ultimately lead to discrimination.
 
In response to Tuesday’s announcement, Taxpayers Protection Alliance Director of Telecom Policy Johnny Kampis said:
 
“This plan is a slippery slope that could unfairly place blame on providers for digital divides. Although (due to economics) providers might not offer broadband to a rural area with a mostly nonwhite population, they could be accused of digital discrimination – even though the same scenario occurs in other rural areas with majority white populations.”
 
Kampis noted that evidence indicates nonwhite groups currently have better access to broadband. Former FCC Chief Economist Glenn Woroch examined Form 477 data showing wireline deployment at the census block level and found that 93.8 percent of nonwhite households received broadband service at the 100Mbps/20 Mbps level compared to 88.8 percent of white households. Woroch also found that income level didn’t affect access because both those populations above and below the federal poverty guidelines had access to broadband at about a 90 percent rate.
 
“The explanation for this is pretty simple: cities – where it’s easier to make the economic case for broadband deployment – have higher nonwhite populations, while rural areas tend to have a higher percentage of white residents,” he said.
 
In a report published last year, the Phoenix Center examined fiber availability and speeds by race and income. Authors George Ford and T. Randolph Beard found that no systematic evidence of digital discrimination was occurring and said digital discrimination would be illogical for a for-profit business.
 
This is a similar point made by the left-leaning Public Knowledge in previous comments to the FCC on the issue. That group noted that “service providers and industry association comments emphasize their efforts to avoid policies and practices of intentional discrimination. There is broad agreement that this is likely the case; no commenter has alleged or described any example of invidious or intentional discrimination directed at people or communities based on race, ethnicity, or religion.”
 
“Codifying rules against digital discrimination is a good step by the FCC,” Kampis said. “But, the commission shouldn’t craft rules that blame providers for those pockets of the United States that still lack broadband access.”
 
###
 
Taxpayers Protection Alliance (TPA) is a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to educating the public through the research, analysis and dissemination of information on the government’s effects on the economy.