Just as the FCC Net Neutrality vote was divided, so too, is the reaction that is still rolling in.
CTIA President/CEO Meredith Attwell Baker said: “The wireless industry champions keeping the internet open and our networks secure and resilient. The FCC’s action today only undermines our ability to achieve those goals while also putting at risk American competitiveness.”
Baker explained, “The 1930s style regulatory framework contained in Title II is the wrong approach for the dynamic and competitive wireless industry. Since 2018, when a light-touch regulatory framework was re-instituted for broadband, wireless investment has increased dramatically year over year. Wireless providers’ capital expenditures reached a historic, all-time high in 2022, with providers investing $39 billion into their networks. Reintroducing regulations intended for utilities risks chilling the innovation and investment in mobile broadband we all want to foster in the United States.”
“Broadband providers have and always will support an open internet. But Title II is not the answer,” said Jonathan Spalter, president and CEO, USTelecom – The Broadband Association. “Title II is, at its heart, a regulatory power grab. Mandating crushing regulatory hurdles will only delay rather than deliver the promise of universal connectivity.”
Louis Peraertz, VP of Policy for WISPA – Broadband Without Boundaries, stated: “The FCC’s proposal to regulate new broadband providers as early 20th Century common carriers is wrong and does not enable broadband providers, particularly small and medium providers, to meet the challenges and the aggressive demands of consumers in the ever-shifting, dynamic high-tech communications marketplace. These proposed rules will retard growth, innovation, and the zeal to take risk and invest, ultimately harming the very marketplace they purportedly are designed to protect.”
The Benton Institute welcomed the vote. “The laws governing U.S. telecommunications have not changed over the last several years. What has changed is the public’s understanding of the critical need for fully functional and reliable high-speed internet access,” said Benton Senior Counselor Andrew Jay Schwartzman. “The COVID epidemic and the changing national security environment, among other things, demonstrate how essential it is for the FCC to restore the protections afforded under Title II of the Communications Act to broadband.”
Schwartzman continued: “Americans now live with daily threats to our online privacy rights, ransomware, and other cybersecurity breaches and network vulnerabilities that impair personal and national security. First responders and people in need of their services, schools and their students, medical providers and their patients, lower income Americans and businesses, governments and family members seeking to communicate with them all need a regulatory process that serves their needs. So, too, new competitors to the large cable and telephone companies need protection against anti-competitive practices.”
“INCOMPAS has a long-standing history of leading on open internet policies that have proven to increase competition and spread connectivity,” said CEO Chip Pickering of the internet and competitive networks association. “We believe Congress should establish a permanent and predictable internet policy framework. However, in light of congressional inaction, we welcome the Commission’s vote to reinstate its limited authority over broadband. This will also ensure every consumer can access the lawful online content and services of their choice and will promote competition, including protecting broadband only providers who need access to poles and multi-tenant environments to deploy their networks.”
The American Consumer Institute said: “Protecting the principle of internet equality is paramount. Without robust safeguards, content may be unfairly prioritized or discriminated against, undermining the core values of an open and unbiased online world.”
By Leslie Stimson, Inside Towers Washington Bureau Chief
Reader Interactions