WASHINGTON, D.C. - Representative Edward J. Markey (D-MA), chairman of the
House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, today chaired a
hearing to examine telecommunications competition issues that have impacted
national broadband deployment over the last decade. Though the United States
was first in the world in broadband deployment in 2000, the country has been
sliding down international broadband rankings ever since.
Below is the chairman's
opening statement:
"Today's hearing is about several issues affecting telecommunications
competition. This hearing comes after
several previous hearings, including two last year that examined
telecommunications competition in the United States, as well as broadband
lessons from abroad.
"Looking back, observers increasingly recognize now that the
United States
started out on the right path by implementing provisions in the 1996
Telecommunications Act that were specifically intended to jump-start
competition both between and among technology platforms. When the Telecommunications Act was enacted in
1996, residential consumers did not have broadband offerings in the marketplace. Yet soon after enactment, deployment by cable
and competitive new entrants prompted incumbent phone companies to finally
deploy such services to residential consumers.
"By 2000, the United States
was ranked first in the world but subsequently regulators began the
ill-considered action of taking the market-opening rules off the books -- and
the U.S.
started to slide down in international broadband rankings. People may quibble with the methodology used
in such rankings, but regardless of how you slice it - price, speed, percentage
of subscribers - the U.S. is clearly no longer on top.
"Ironically, our foreign competitors are now enjoying
broadband success stories by adopting and implementing many of the policies
that were embodied in the Telecommunications Act but that the FCC has
subsequently abandoned.
"Several pressing competition issues, including pole
attachment rates, interconnection issues, number porting timeframes, copper
wire retirement, and forbearance legislation, are before the Subcommittee
today. And each of these issues, if
resolved correctly, can help promote greater broadband deployment, speeds, and
consumer choice.
"These issues also highlight the repercussions caused by the
FCC's regulatory re-classification of services such as broadband access to the
Internet. This semantic confusion and
the ensuing regulatory uncertainty leave countless carriers and industry
participants without clear direction as to their legal rights and obligations
under the law. The fact that one
incumbent provider, Vermont Telephone, felt that it was empowered to deny
interconnection to another provider shows how far some in the industry, as well
as at the FCC, have strayed from the intent of Congress in the
Telecommunications Act. The continued
invocation of intuited or ancillary authority under Title I of the
Communications Act to alternatively modify, waive, or plug statutory holes in
our nation's communications laws and regulations is untenable in the long term
in my view. Congress should address
these issues, and others including broadband consumer protection issues,
comprehensively in the next Congress, as part of overarching broadband policy
legislation.
"Today's hearing is also a formal legislative hearing on H.R.
3914, a bill offered by Chairman John Dingell and myself addressing forbearance
issues. This legislation fixes a glaring
problem in the Communications Act by removing the so-called ‘deemed granted'
provision contained in Section 10 of the Communications Act. This provision currently permits automatic
deregulation of duly enacted statutes if the Commission fails to act within the
statutory time period. This can occur even if a tie vote demonstrates no clear
majority supports such deregulation. With
the Commission having permitted forbearance on a two-two tie previously, and
possibly having just 4 Commissioners serving early next year, this concern is
not purely theoretical.
"If there is a clear majority to support forbearance of
specific obligations, then let's have the FCC act in timely fashion, with
written justification, to approve such forbearance. But an agency's inability to act should not
result in the removal of statutory duties that may have taken Congress years,
and a clear Congressional majority, to enact.
"In addition, I continue to be concerned about the process
by which the Commission considers forbearance petitions. In the past, industry petitioners have gamed
the proceeding by filing amendments to their petitions so late in the time
period for consideration that affected parties and the public have no
meaningful opportunity to consider and respond to the proposed amendments. The Commission has an open proceeding to
reform this obvious abuse of the process and I urge the Commission to act to
protect the integrity of its proceedings and the public interest.
"I want to thank the witnesses for their willingness to provide
testimony this afternoon and to answer questions.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 22, 2008 |
CONTACT: Jessica Schafer, 202.225.2836
|
|