Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Saturday February 04 2017, @05:42PM   Printer-friendly
from the transparent-and-neutral dept.

FCC Tries Something New: Making Proposals Public Before Voting on Them

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai yesterday announced a seemingly simple step to make the FCC's rulemaking process more open to the public: the FCC intends to release the full text of rulemakings before they're voted on instead of days after the vote.

Pai and fellow Republican Michael O'Rielly repeatedly complained about the secrecy of rulemakings when Democrat Tom Wheeler was chairman. Wheeler followed the practice of previous chairs by publicly releasing a summary of the proposed rules a few weeks before the FCC's meetings, while negotiations over the final text of orders continued behind closed doors. The actual text of rulemakings wasn't released until after the vote. In the case of net neutrality, Pai complained three weeks before the vote that he couldn't share the full text of the draft order with the public. The full text wasn't released until two weeks after the vote.

"Today, we begin the process of making the FCC more open and transparent," Pai said yesterday. He then released the text of two proposals scheduled for a vote at the commission's meeting on February 23, one on allowing TV broadcasters to use the new ATSC 3.0 broadcast standard and another on "giving AM radio broadcasters more flexibility in siting their FM translators."

[...] This would certainly make it easier for journalists to report on the impacts of rulemakings before they're voted on. Congressional Republicans pressed Wheeler to make releasing the text of orders in advance a standard practice, and there is pending legislation that would make it a requirement. But Wheeler said during his chairmanship that such a practice would cause long delays in rulemakings. Wheeler told Republicans in Congress in May 2015 that making the full text public in advance could make it easier for opponents to kill proposals they don't like.

[...] While Pai hasn't yet committed to making the pre-vote release of orders permanent, O'Rielly said he's confident that the pilot project will go smoothly. "If this initial attempt goes well—and I see no reason why it wouldn't—I think we will all find this to be a significant upgrade in terms of quality of feedback, quality of process, and ultimately quality of the commission's work product," O'Rielly said. O'Rielly acknowledged that the change "may make our jobs a bit more challenging," but he added that "it is the right thing to do for the American people, the practitioners before the commission and the professional press who report on commission activities."

Source:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/fcc-tries-something-new-making-proposals-public-before-voting-on-them/

FCC Rescinds Claim That AT&T and Verizon Violated Net Neutrality

The Federal Communications Commission's new Republican leadership has rescinded a determination that AT&T and Verizon Wireless violated net neutrality rules with paid data cap exemptions. The FCC also rescinded several other Wheeler-era reports and actions. The FCC released its report on the data cap exemptions (aka "zero-rating") in the final days of Democrat Tom Wheeler's chairmanship. Because new Chairman Ajit Pai opposed the investigation, the FCC has now formally closed the proceeding.

The FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau sent letters to AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile USA notifying the carriers "that the Bureau has closed this inquiry. Any conclusions, preliminary or otherwise, expressed during the course of the inquiry will have no legal or other meaning or effect going forward." The FCC's Wireline Competition Bureau also sent a letter to Comcast closing an inquiry into the company's Stream TV cable service, which does not count against data caps.

The FCC issued an order that "sets aside and rescinds" the Wheeler-era report on zero-rating. All "guidance, determinations, and conclusions" from that report are rescinded, and it will have no legal bearing on FCC proceedings going forward, the order said.

[...] Pai opposed Wheeler's zero-rating investigation, saying that free data offerings are "popular among consumers precisely because they allow more access to online music, videos, and other content free of charge." He has also vowed to overturn the FCC's net neutrality rules and hasn't committed to enforcing them while they remain in place. "While this is just a first step, these companies, and others, can now safely invest in and introduce highly popular products and services without fear of commission intervention based on newly invented legal theories," Republican FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly said today.

Source:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/fcc-rescinds-claim-that-att-and-verizon-violated-net-neutrality/


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 05 2017, @01:20PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 05 2017, @01:20PM (#463104)

    This may come as a surprise to you, but Trump is not particularly politically correct. For instance in the past LBJ regularly referred to the Civil Rights Act of 1957, which he fought hard to help pass, as "the nigger bill."

    The bill is unambiguously and entirely about keeping out radicalized individuals or individuals with views that are incompatible with the fundamental principles of the United States - by whatever name Trump may refer to them. I think trying to peer into his motivations is little more than speculation and hearsay. Judge people by their actions; this action is extremely reasonable. If he takes things a step further, I will be the first to go back on my position. But if he doesn't take things a step further and simply continues along the path that it seems he is - which is to work to simply try to improve American security in a fair yet firm approach - would you go back on your views and biases against him? Or will you constantly play a game of "Just wait - I know he's going to turn into Hitler tomorrow!" until the day he leaves office?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 05 2017, @01:23PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 05 2017, @01:23PM (#463105)

    The pros and cons of posting anonymously. To clarify, the point of the LBJ example is to emphasize that just because somebody speaks of something in a way that has a negative connotation does not necessarily speak to their intent. LBJ played a crucial and unbelievably beneficial role in the civil rights movement in the US even though he would be crucified by the political correctness or death mobs of today.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 06 2017, @03:54AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 06 2017, @03:54AM (#463282)

    The bill is unambiguously and entirely about keeping out radicalized individuals or individuals with views that are incompatible with the fundamental principles of the United States

    Where "views that are incompatible with the fundamental principles of the United States" means whateverthefuck the minority president wants it to mean. And that's how bigotry works - bigots always have a rationalization for why their particular flavor of bigotry is justified. Its always bullshit.