Cable broadband operators are solidly behind a bill that could reduce the potential overbuilding power of some of the Biden Administration's billions of dollars in infrastructure investment. Potential overbuilding is a big issue given the size of the broadband investment -- about $65 billion -- and the Administration's signals that price and quality will factor into where it concludes broadband is not available sufficient to the public's needs.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) is the lead sponsor of the Connect Unserved Americans Act, which would take several steps to reduce the amount of overbuilding allowed in serving the unserved.

“We strongly support Sen. Thune’s bipartisan Connect Unserved Americans Act which increases the USDA ReConnect Program’s unserved requirement for funding provided by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act from 50% to 80%," said NCTA-the Internet & Television Association.

Also: GOP: Broadband Money Must Go to Unserved

The bill also addresses the issue of multiple broadband subsidy programs and the possibility of funding overlap. "The legislation also requires the Treasury Department to coordinate with the USDA, NTIA and the FCC to ensure each of those government agencies’ broadband programs are working effectively with each other to not duplicate funding in communities where a grant or loan has already been provided," said NCTA.

NCTA argues the bill's changes are about standing up for unconnected communities and improving the efficiency of government programs. ■

Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), and Mark Warner (D-Va.), have reintroduced a bill that would require more transparency about edge providers' use of secret algorithms to frame user's online experience.

The Filter Bubble Transparency Act, which was introduced back in 2019, requires large internet platforms (over 1 million users and generating more than $50 million in gross revenues, to inform users how their experience is being shaped and allow them to exit that information bubble if they choose.

Also Read: Big Tech Sues Florida

Specifically, the bill would require those platforms to:

1. "Clearly notify its users that their platform creates a filter bubble that uses secret algorithms (computer-generated filters) to determine the order or manner in which information is delivered to users; and

2. "Provide its users with the option of a filter bubble-free view of the information they provide. The bill would enable users to transition between a customized, filter bubble-generated version of information and a non-filter bubble version (for example, the “sparkle icon” option that is currently offered by Twitter that allows users to toggle between a personalized timeline and a purely chronological timeline)."

It would be illegal for anyone to operate a covered online platform that uses a "secret algorithm" unless the above two conditions are met. The Federal Trade Commission would enforce the legislation, including giving it the power to seek civil penalties for willful violations.

The bill's 2019 bipartisan incarnation may not have made it into law, but Silicon Valley is under renewed, heavy, and bipartisan criticism for how it treats content and its users.

“Big tech’s manipulative algorithms have exploited consumers and their data for far too long,” said Blumenthal. “By notifying and providing users with options for how they are viewing information, this bill will grant Americans the transparency and privacy they deserve. I’m proud to join a bipartisan coalition in the ongoing fight for stronger data privacy protections.”

“The more transparency consumers have with respect to how social media and other internet platforms prioritize content on their services, the better,” said Thune, ranking member of the Senate Commerce Committee Communications Subcommittee (all the bill's sponsors but Warner are members of the committee). “This legislation helps consumers better understand how algorithms are used to select content in their ‘feed’ and gives users more control over what information they are digesting. I’d like to thank Sen. Schatz for adding his support to this bill, which increases the momentum behind this important issue.”

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Communications Subcommittee, signaled Wednesday that he and a Democratic colleague are introducing a bill aimed at Sec. 230, which is the surviving section of the Communications Decency Act that exempts web sites from civil liability over their handling of third-party speech on their platforms. 

At an FCC oversight hearing in the Senate Commerce Committee, Thune, former chairman of the committee, said he would be teaming up with Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) to introduce the Platform Accountability  and Consumer Transparency (PACT) Act that he said would provide more accountability and transparency about how large tech platforms treat their content and make their content moderation decisions. 

At that same hearing, where Sec. 230 was prominently featured, all the FCC commissioners agreed Big Tech had transparency issues that need addressing, while Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said securing such transparency would be "transformative." 

Thune said the act drew from Sec. 230 reforms offered up by the Justice Department and Attorney General Bill Barr last week. 

A bipartisan quintet of senators has introduced a bill to help close the telecommunications workforce gap.

The senators are John Thune (R-S.D.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). 

The bill is the Telecommunications Skilled Workforce Act. 

“This legislation builds off the work I’ve already done to make 5G a reality in South Dakota by getting skilled workers to industries that will deliver 5G services and technology across the country, particularly in rural areas of my state,” said Thune in a statement.  

The bill would help create a next-gen workforce by: 

1. "Establishing a Department of Labor (DOL)-led interagency working group that, in consultation with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and other federal and non-federal stakeholders, would be tasked with developing recommendations to address the workforce needs of the telecommunications industry. 

2. "Requiring the DOL, in consultation with the FCC, to issue guidance on how states can address the workforce shortage in the telecommunications industry by identifying all of the federal resources currently available to them that can be used for workforce development efforts. 

3. "Directing the Government Accountability Office to conduct a study to determine the specific number of skilled telecommunications workers that will be required to build and maintain broadband infrastructure in rural areas and the 5G wireless infrastructure needed to support 5G wireless technology." 

“CTIA supports the efforts of Senators Thune, Tester, Moran, Peters, and Wicker to ensure we have the skilled workforce necessary to deploy next-generation networks," said Kelly Cole, senior VP of CTIA, "which will enable the U.S. to secure its global leadership in the emerging 5G economy." 

“NATE Chairman Jimmy Miller recently testified before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation on the workforce development challenges currently confronting the industry," said Todd Schlekeway, executive director of the National Association of Tower Erectors. "NATE believes this bipartisan legislation is a strong response to the issues that were highlighted at the hearing and can serve as a springboard to fostering greater collaboration between the federal government and state workforce boards..."

Both sides of the aisle and the Hill were claiming victory, and sharing credit, for Senate passage of the bipartisan Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence (TRACED Act), a bill that would mandate free default robocall blocking, something the FCC has authorized and pushed carriers to adopt by the end of the year anyway, threatening to mandate it if that didn't happen.

Related: Cable Ops Oppose Robocall Blocking Mandate

Among other things, the bill would give the FCC civil fining authority of up to $20,000 per call for those who "intentionally flout" telemarketing restrictions. That could add up given that, by some estimates, spam calls make up over 40% of all calls. It would also extend the statute of limitations for taking action against illegal robocalls from one year to three.

The bill would help punish bad actors--the FCC could seek financial penalties for misleading calls--and verify good calls, said its backers.

"President Expected to Sign Thune-Markey Bill to Crack Down on Illegal Robocalls," said a press release from the office of Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) which pointed out that the senate first passed the bill in May, then the House passed a modified version in Dec. 4, and now the Senate had passed that House version and it was headed to the President's desk.

Related: House Approves Omnibus Robocall Bill

"The TRACED Act cracks down on scammers by requiring phone carriers to authenticate whether calls are legitimate, and then blocking unverified robocalls at no charge to consumers," said Markey. "I thank Senator [John] Thune [R-S.D.] for his unwavering partnership on this important consumer protection issue. I hope the President quickly signs this bill into law so that families can enjoy a new year of family calls instead of robocalls.”

On the House side, Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.), Republican Leader Greg Walden (R-Ore.), Communications Subcommittee chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), and Subcommittee Republican Leader Bob Latta (R-Ohio) praised of the "Pallone-Thune TRACED Act," which was the name of the compromise bill.

“We’re delighted the Senate acted quickly to pass this legislation to shutdown illegal robocalls," they said. "We’re working hard to help the American people get real relief from these relentless and illegal calls. We look forward to the President signing this overwhelmingly bipartisan legislation into law very soon."

Specifically, the bill:

1. "Requires carriers to offer call-authentication technology to consumers and small businesses—in rural and urban America—at no additional charge;

2. "Requires opt-in or opt-out robocall blocking be offered at no additional charge to consumers;

3. "Gives the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the ability to step up enforcement actions against unlawful robocalls with a longer statute of limitations and increased fines in certain cases;

4. "Pushes the Department of Justice to bring more criminal prosecutions against criminal robocallers;

5. "Requires the FCC to work to stop one-ring scams;

6. "Helps the FCC and responsible carriers traceback and cutoff suspect phone companies that are responsible for sending vast numbers of unlawful robocalls; and

7. "Protects patients, doctors, and hospitals from unlawful robocalls."

“We applaud Senate and House passage of the TRACED Act, and commend the bipartisan leadership on both sides of the Capitol for passing legislation that protects consumers from these frustrating calls," said NCTA-The Internet & Television Association. "Illegal robocalls have flooded phones for far too long, and TRACED takes meaningful steps to keep consumers safe from scammers. We urge the president to take swift action and sign this important legislation into law.”

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) has scheduled a hearing on the implementation of his MOBILE NOW Act.

The hearing, titled appropriately enough “The Evolution of Next-Generation Technologies: Implementing MOBILE NOW,” will be Dec. 5 at 10 a.m. 

The hearing will examine the implementation of several mandates required by the Making Opportunities for Broadband Investment and Limiting Excessive and Needless Obstacles to Wireless Act (MOBILE NOW). Witnesses will discuss MOBILE NOW’s spectrum provisions and the streamlining of broadband infrastructure on federal lands, among other things. 

Witnesses for the hearing are Paul TenHaken, mayor, Sioux Falls, S. D.; Jonathan Adelstein, president, Wireless Infrastructure Association (and former FCC commissioner); Scott Bergmann, senior vice president, regulatory affairs, CTIA—The Wireless Association ; Mary Brown, senior director, technology and spectrum policy, Cisco; and Sarah Morris, director, Open Technology Institute, New America. 

The MOBILE NOW Act makes sure that the FCC makes mid-band spectrum available for commercial use by 2020. It both promotes making more next-gen 5G wireless spectrum available and reduces obstacles to building out networks. 

The witnesses are being asked to talk about spectrum provisions in the bill and streamlining infrastructure buildouts on federal lands.

The Republican leadership of the Senate Commerce Committee has come out strongly in favor of the FCC auctioning C-band spectrum, which works out since their proposed bill came out the same day FCC Chairman Ajit Pai announced he is proposing to auction that spectrum.  

Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee and Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Communications Subcommittee, have introduced the 5G Spectrum Act. 

The FCC had already said it planned to free up as much C-band spectrum as possible to turn over to carriers for 5G, but the senators want to make sure the framework jibes with their own, which would:  

"Provide the coverage and capacity essential for deployment in America’s rural communities. 

"Require the FCC to conduct a public auction of C band spectrum.

"Require the auction to start no later than December 31, 2020.

"Require the FCC to make available at least 280 MHz of spectrum.

"Require the FCC to capture for the taxpayer at least 50 percent of the fair market value of the spectrum.

Related: FCC's Pai: U.S. Will Lead Way in 5G Deployment

Pai's announced proposal would check at least three of those boxes: 1) public auction, 2) of 280 MHz of spectrum, 3) by the end of 2020.  

It must still be voted, but the chairman would not likely have announced his plan--via Twitter--had he not had at least two other commissioners on board.

Competitive Carriers Association President Steven K. Berry liked what he saw in the Wicker-Thune bill, though at press time he had not commented on the Pai proposal.

“The 5G Spectrum Act clearly has the public interest in mind by ensuring at least fifty percent of the auction proceeds are reserved for American taxpayers," he said. "The C-band spectrum is a taxpayer-owned resource, and it only makes sense that a significant portion of the proceeds benefit the U.S. Treasury or are otherwise used as directed by Congress. It is a good day for consumers, competition and the economy, and I thank Senators Wicker and Thune for their work on this important issue.”

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) will hold a field hearing on rural broadband Sept. 5 at the Southeast Technical Institute in Sioux Falls. 

Thune is chairman of the Senate Communications Subcommittee and former chair of the full committee.  

Among the witnesses for the hearing will be fellow Republican and FCC commissioner Brendan Carr. 

Other witnesses are Dr. José-Marie Griffiths, president, Dakota State University; Deanna Larson, president, Avera eCARE; Mark Shlanta, CEO, SDN Communications; Craig Snyder, CEO, VIKOR Teleconstruction; Michael Adelaine, VP for Technology and Security, South Dakota State University. 

The hearing, entitled Transforming Rural America: A New Era of Innovation will "examine the innovations high-speed broadband services bring to rural America in a variety of sectors such as agriculture, education, health care, and small business." 

That examination will include the need for more reliable broadband connectivity in rural America. 

WASHINGTON — FCC chairman Ajit Pai has said his agency is still vetting various proposals for freeing up C-band spectrum, amid signals that it could be leaning toward a marketplace sale rather than an commission-conducted auction.

That would be good news for the C-Band Alliance, a group of international satellite carriers with those spectrum licenses looking to cash in on sales through deals with carriers. It could also be a payday for cable operators and broadcasters.

Democrats on Capitol Hill have been pushing back publicly on marketplace deals, so the issue was very much in the spotlight and remains complicated.

The Federal Communications Commission voted unanimously in July 2018 to find ways to open up the C-band spectrum (3.7 to 4.2 Gigahertz) — either all of the proposed 500 Megahertz or some portion of it — for terrestrial wireless use. Those ways could include an incentive or capacity auction, a market mechanism in which incumbents voluntarily strike deals to reduce their footprint, or some other means.

“The FCC is still considering the merits of various proposals and making sure that whatever it does is legally supportable,” one cable lobbyist following the proceedings said.

Repack Proceeds Possible

One of those proposals includes cutting cable and broadcast in on the proceeds from a C-band repack. That’s something ACA Connects, the trade group for smaller, independent MSOs, has said should happen as long as whatever the FCC decides protects incumbents from interference from wireless carriers getting the spectrum.

The FCC has asked stakeholders to comment on what authority they think the regulator has to compensate satellite operators that use the spectrum to deliver network programming to cable operators and TV stations, as well as its authority to compensate incumbent MSOs and broadcasters that might have to find other spectrum or use another delivery system, depending on how much spectrum it winds up reclaiming in the band.

Pai told Congress following the request for the targeted input on a “certain course of action” that the last thing the FCC wanted to do was something it thought was “in the best interests of the American people but [would] then be stuck in the courts for a long time.”

That the FCC was delving deeper into the compensation issue was good news for the alliance. So was a letter to the chairman from two top Senate Republicans who together chair the committee and subcommittee with primary jurisdiction over the FCC.

In that letter, Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and John Thune (R-S.D.) signaled speed is of the essence, given that the C-band (3.7-4.2 GHz) is midband spectrum, ideal for 5G because of its propagation characteristics.

The senators did more than that. They said, in no uncertain terms, that getting that C-band spectrum to market ASAP could be the difference between winning and losing the race to 5G, a race that President Donald Trump has said the United States must win.

“Your action to speed up the availability of midband spectrum for 5G will play a crucial role in determining whether the American people will reap the full benefits of next-generation technology and whether the United States will win the massive economic benefits associated with leading the world in 5G,” Wicker and Thune wrote.

They did not tell the FCC to forgo an auction for marketplace deals, but they did urge the agency “to act quickly.”

Diane VanBeber, a vice president at C-Band Alliance member Intelsat, called the Thune-Wicker input “the right letter at the right time … We’ve got some solid footing here and we’re continuing to build our case.”

Pai has signaled that an FCC auction, though it would put money in the U.S. Treasury rather than in satellite operators’ pockets, might not be the fastest route to freeing up the spectrum.

Could Be Years Away

With another millimeter-wave auction scheduled for the end of the year and a Universal Service Fund auction to conduct, it could be a couple of years before a C-band auction could be completed. At a recent Senate Appropriations Committee budget hearing, and again in a House oversight hearing, Pai was pressed about the potential billions of dollars to the treasury that might be lost to a marketplace approach.

He said the FCC had to balance a number of factors, but it’s focused on the speed of freeing up that spectrum given that 5G leadership is a top U.S. priority, not only for competitiveness but for investment and innovation.

While Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Calif.) has signaled new legislation could help resolve the issue, Pai suggested that waiting for Congress could work against the need for speed.

Senate Republican leaders have urged FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to move faster to free up midband spectrum, signaling that doing so could help determine the winner in the race to 5G, a race President Donald Trump says the U.S. has to win.  

It seemed a bit like carrying coals to Newcastle, but the Republican chairs of the Senate Commerce Committee and Communications Subcommittee sent a letter to Pai last week urging him to speed the freeing-up and deployment of 5G spectrum, particularly midband spectrum. 

They are looking specifically at the C-band (3.7-4.2 GHz), which the FCC is currently considering just how to, and how much to, free up, including extending the comment period last week to get more input on what authority it has to compensate incumbent stakeholders in that effort. 

Related: Senate Looks to Speed Up Spectrum Availability 

They said the FCC has been making enormous progress, particularly in higher bands, but that the U.S. lags other countries in freeing up mid-band and needs to pick up the pace. They put the onus on the chairman in no uncertain terms. 

"Your action to speed up the availability of mid-band spectrum for 5G will play a crucial role in determining whether the American people will reap the full benefits of next-generation technology and whether the United States will win the massive economic benefits associated with leading the world in 5G." 

The FCC has been auctioning high-band (millimeter wave) spectrum over the past few months--the 24GHz and 28 GHz spectrum-- with more on the way, something the senators acknowledge. But the senators, Commerce Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Subcommittee Chair John Thune (R-S.D.),  say they want Chairman Pai to pick up the pace on the C-Band spectrum, which is in the mid-band sweet spot of propagation and resiliency. 

“In MOBILE NOW [Thune motormanned that bill]  Congress directed the FCC to evaluate commercial wireless use of spectrum in the 3.7 GHz to 4.2 GHz band, and the Commission has begun the process," they wrote. "In the year since passage of that law, the need for action has become even more acute. It has been estimated that accelerating infrastructure deployment by one year could drive an additional $100 billion in economic impact in the next three years. Therefore, we urge the Commission to act quickly to make spectrum in the 3.7 GHz to 4.2 GHz band available for 5G.” 

The Hill is getting serious about cracking down on illegal robocalls. FCC chair Ajit Pai has made that a priority, but the Senate was signaling he needed some help.

The Senate Commerce Committee Wednesday (April 3) passed the bipartisan Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence (TRACED) Act, which was introduced by Sens. John Thune (DR-S.D.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.).

The bill boosts the FCC's authority to fine telemarketers, gives it more time to identify them and take action, and requires carriers to adopt call ID technologies.

Thune said more needed to be done to combat the scourge of unwanted calls. "I’m glad the committee recognized the importance of this legislation to combat this problem, which is now the top consumer complaint submitted to the Federal Trade Commission," he said.

The bill:

1. "Broadens the authority of the Federal Communications Commission to levy civil penalties of up to $10,000 per call on people who intentionally flout telemarketing restrictions.

2. "Extends the window for the FCC to catch and take civil enforcement action against intentional violations to three years after a robocall is placed. Under current law, the FCC has only one year to do so, and the FCC has told the committee that “even a one-year longer statute of limitations for enforcement” would improve enforcement against willful violators.

3. Brings together the Department of Justice, FCC, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Department of Commerce, Department of State, Department of Homeland Security, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and other relevant federal agencies, as well as state attorneys general and other non-federal entities to identify and report to Congress on improving deterrence and criminal prosecution at the federal and state level of robocall scams.

4. "Requires voice service providers to adopt call authentication technologies, enabling a telephone carrier to verify that incoming calls are legitimate before they reach consumers’ phones.

Directs the FCC to initiate a rulemaking to help protect subscribers from receiving unwanted calls or texts from callers."

Cable operators said they appreciated the effort and NCTA-The Internet & Television Association said it would work with other members for full Senate passage.

“Combatting illegal robocalls is a serious and complex problem. NCTA appreciates the bipartisan leadership of Senators Thune and Markey on the Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence (TRACED) Act to keep consumers safe from scammers," NCTA said.

Charter suggested it was already hard at work weeding out the calls, but appreciated the help.

“Like everyone else, Charter wants annoying robocalls calls to end and we’re working hard to stopping these unwanted and illegal calls that are not only a nuisance but can also be a security threat," the company said. "Charter is committed to offering our customers a broad range of tools including call blocking, screening, and identification features like the Nomorobo app to help them control the calls they receive. Like other voice providers, we’re also implementing the call authentication protocol known as SHAKEN/STIR. We support legislation by Senators Thune and Markey that proposes meaningful timeframes around that effort and significantly enhances consumer protections.”

“For years, USTelecom and our members have been hard at work tracking down illegal robocallers, leading the way in the deployment of new call authentication standards to accelerate the fight against the robocall epidemic and thwart efforts to defraud American consumers," said Patrick Halley, SVP of law and policy. "The TRACED Act will bolster our shared goal of bringing illegal robocallers to justice with enhanced government prosecution, including criminal prosecution.”

“We thank Senators Thune and Markey for developing a balanced, bipartisan approach to combatting illegal and unwanted robocalls and applaud today’s action on the TRACED Act in the Senate," said CTIA, the wireless association. "This bipartisan legislation enhances the FCC’s ability to protect American consumers and acknowledges the important role the wireless industry has to play in implementing call authentication.”

U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Communications Subcommittee, has scheduled a hearing on "The Impact of Broadband Investments in Rural America."The hearing will be March 12 at 2:30. It will focus on the FCC's efforts to boost rural broadband, as wesll as "opportunities and investments to support carriers in rural America, efforts to prevent overbuilding among federal broadband programs, and the next steps to close the digital divide."FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has said that his rollback of net neutrality rules boosted the kind of broadband investment needed to close the rural digital divide. In the FCC's draft of the latest Sec. 706 report to Congress, it concluded that the FCC has "substantially closed the divide between broadband haves and have nots--the have nots over-rindex for rural Americans where there is a tougher business case, or not at all, for connectivity.The current report's conclusion is based in part on findings that nearly 291 million (out of about 325 million) Americans have access to fixed broadband at speeds of 100 Mbps/10 Mpbs, up 20%, from 244.3 million. While access to a whopping 250 Mbps/50 Mbps fixed broadband was up over 45% to 205.2 million, with rural access to those speeds almost doubling.  The hearing witnesses, subject to change, are Justin Forde, senior director of government relations, Midcontinent Communications; Mark Jamison, visiting scholar, American Enterprise Institute; Denny Law, general manager and CEO, Golden West Telecommunications, and Carol Mattey, principal, Mattey Consulting, LLC.

Only a couple of days before his committee's hearing on data privacy, Senate Commerce Committee chair Roger Wicker headed a letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai wanting some answers following a story in Business Insider that the company had failed to disclose that there was a microphone it its Nest Secure home security device.

Google said that not to have mentioned the mics in the devices' technical specs was an "error." The senators want to make sure that was all it was, and that there are no similar errors out there yet to be discovered.

Wicker, joined by Sens. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), chairman of the Consumer Protection Subcommittee, and John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Communications Subcommittee, want to know when Google realized the mics had not been disclosed, how it developed those specs, and more.

In the letter, the senators pointed out that there is growing concern about large tech companies "collecting and using personal data about [consumers] without their knowledge."

They said it was important that Google be "completely transparent" and provide "full disclosure," something that could well be part of general privacy legislation that both Democrats and Republicans are suggesting needs to be hammered out on online privacy.

They also pointed out that Google's chief privacy officer testified last September before the Commerce Committee that "transparency is a core value." They told Pichai that given that pledge, the failure to disclose the mic raised "serious questions" about its commitment to that value.

Even if Google was not using the mic, hackers could have activated it to record illicitly, they said, though not pointing out the irony of using a "secure" device to do so.

The senators want a half dozen questions answered by March 12 (by 5 p.m.), including whether Nests have always had mics, when and how it became aware it had failed to list it in the spec, if Google is aware of any third party having used the device for any unauthorized purpose and whether there are any other "similar omissions" in the tech specs for other Google products.

A trio of Republicans wants some answers from Marriott on the breach of half a billion guest records going back over four years.

That came in a letter to Marriott president Arne Sorenson from Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee; Roger Wicker, chairman of the Communications Subcommittee, and Jerry Moran, chairman of the Consumer Protection Subcommittee.

Marriott has apologized and has set up a Web site and call center to answer questions, emailed those impacted, and will provide a free online security monitoring service.

But the legislators still have a lot of questions about the breach they want answered. Those include when it discovered the breach, which dated back to 2014, how many credit card numbers were exposed (Marriott says they were encrypted, but isn't sure that the hackers didn't get the keys to unlock them), and a timeline of events, including relevant notifications or investigations.

They want those answers no later than 5 p.m. on Dec. 17.

Sen John Thune (R-S.D.) is holding a 5G hearing at Carnegie Hall.

More specifically, that would be Carnegie Town Hall in Sioux Falls, S.D., on Oct. 12, where Thune will focus on barriers to deployment of next-gen wireless.

There to provide the FCC view of that challenge will be the FCC commissioner who is championing the FCC's efforts to speed deployment by removing barriers like extensive local site reviews, commissioner Brendan Carr.

Over the objections of local government officials and the reservations of Democratic commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, the FCC voted last month to streamline the path to small cell deployment, billing it as crucial to the rollout of 5G wireless service, an FCC and Trump Administration priority.

Carr, who championed the item, said it would cut $2 billion in red tape, "which changes the prospects for communities that might otherwise be left behind" in the effort to close the digital divide, he said.

Other witnesses at the Oct. 12 hearing will be Sioux Falls mayor Paul TenHaken; Dr. José-Marie Griffiths, president of Dakota State University; Robert Fisher, SVP, federal government affairs, for Verizon; and Justin Forde, senior director, government relations, for Midcontinent Communications.

Like many inside and outside the Beltway, Thune is focused on the problems and challenges of deploying next-gen wireless broadband, particularly making sure that rural areas like his home state are not left behind in the rush to a 5G-driven, Iot-centric world.

Thune spoke at a recent White House summit on 5G, where he put in a plug for freeing up more spectrum, including unlicensed."we must be mindful of the critical role unlicensed spectrum plays in the development of 5G and throughout the communications landscape," he told the White House gathering. "WiFi operating on unlicensed spectrum is responsible for a tremendous and growing amount of the data transmitted in our homes and offices, and will play an increasing role in the future."

ISPs would second that notion since WiFi hotspots are currently the primary mobile broadband play for cable broadband providers.

Calls for Mark Zuckerberg to testify before Congress intensified Friday.

At about the same time House leaders were 'inviting' the Facebook CEO to appear before the House Energy & Commerce Committee in the near future, their counterparts on the Senate Commerce Committee were doing the same.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chair of the committee, and ranking member Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) released a joint statement making the request and citing the Cambridge Analytica access to Facebook data of 50 million users.

Related: Markey Wants Investigation Into Facebook-Cambridge 'Bombshell'

“During our time leading the Commerce Committee, several questions about Facebook’s responsibilities and obligations to users have arisen even as the company’s reach and importance have grown. As a result, we have decided to ask Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to testify before our committee," they said.

Facebook employees privately briefed Commerce Committee staffers on what the legislators were billing as only the "most recent controversy."

The did not say when they would hold a hearing and invite Zuckerberg's testimony, beyond saying it would be in the "coming weeks," and that they would work with Zuckerberg and Facebook to find a suitable date.

But they were clearly unhappy with the company. "[W]e believe Mr. Zuckerberg’s testimony is necessary to gain a better understanding of how the company plans to restore lost trust, safeguard users’ data, and end a troubling series of belated responses to serious problems."

They did point out that Facebook has yet to provide written information about the controversy, with a March 29 deadline looming.

It might make sense to double up with the House E&C for a day-long affair.

A majority of the nominees for FTC commissioner told a Senate Commerce Committee panel Wednesday (Feb. 14) that they are willing to take a new look at Big Tech firms like Google and Facebook, and regulate them if necessary.

That came at a Senate Commerce Committee nomination hearing on President Donald Trump's four nominees for the Federal Trade Commission: Joseph Simons (Republican chair), Rohit Chopra (Democrat), Noah Joshua Phillips (Republican) and Christine S. Wilson (Republican)

Commerce Committee chair Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said he hoped to move the nominations quickly to the floor for a vote, and scheduled a vote for the committee's next markup.

The FTC has been at only two commissioners (there are supposed to be five) for many months.

Thune asked the nominees about antitrust enforcement and calls for more regulatory oversight of "Big Tech" firms like Facebook and Google.

Related: Edge Providers Push for Network Neutrality CRA

Those firms have been increasingly under scrutiny on the Hill and elsewhere both for their size and their business practices, driven in part by the scrutiny of social media in the wake of the Russian election meddling, fake news, and ongoing concerns about online sex trafficking.

Simons said that "at a high level," big is not necessarily either good or bad. He said oftentimes a company's success is because they offer a good service at a low price, and the government shouldn't mess with that. But, he said, if a company is using anticompetitive means to get big or stay big, "then we should be vigorously enforcing the antitrust laws and prohibiting that conduct." He did not say what category he thought either Google or Facebook fell into.

Wilson said she understood there had been investigations into companies in the past--Google, for one, has come under FTC scrutiny for its search practices. She said given the "elapse of time" since those and the changes in technology, "it may make sense to take another look at concerns that have been raised." She said there is no company beyond the reach of the law and that she would support Chairman Simons in looking into potentially unlawful conduct, "and following the facts where they lead."

Phillips called it "the big question." He said he experiences daily the "incredible impact" those companies have on his life and of others, including his children. He said the FCC has a "big role" in applying the law carefully and fairly, and keeping up with trends. He said he would help keep the agency abreast of those developments and, if there are violations of the law, no matter who was committing them, the FTC would enforce it.

Chopra did not appear ready to put the hammer down on Big Tech. He said that unlike most sectors, large tech companies are competing with several other verticals, healthcare, retail, and other sectors. Chopra said it has been a challenge to predict how market dynamics occur and that the FTC needed to engage in constant learning. He also said that it was an area to be humble" and continue to "learn the dynamics."

Ranking member Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) used the hearing to put in a plug for net neutrality, or more to the point, a knock on the FCC's deeding of net neutrality oversight primarily to the FTC when it reclassified broadband access as a Title I information service in the Dec. 14 Restoring Internet Freedom Order.

"Simply put, the FTC is not the agency for net neutrality." He said that despite the amazing things the FTC does, it "does not have the expertise, resources or authority to adopt forward-looking rules to protect broadband consumers," he said.

Nelson said to look out for a Senate vote on the Congressional Review Act resolution to nullify that Restoring Internet Freedom order and return the Title II-based rules. He said his support for the CRA is not inconsistent with his belief that there needs to be a bipartisan legislative long-term solution with real protections.

Thune added a "here, here" to that call for bipartisan solution, adding: "Hopefully, we will be able to get there in due time."

Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), one of the biggest backers of the net neutrality rules the Ajit Pai FCC rolled back, also talked about the lack of FTC expertise on keeping networks open.

Chopra, a Democrat, said he shared many of Markey's concerns, and those of sitting FCC Democratic Commissioner Terrell McSweeny about overseeing the internet. For one, he cited an ongoing challenge by the FTC in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals of a lower court ruling raising the possibility that some players could be exempt from FTC internet oversight, while others are not.

Following up on that, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) asked all the commissioners to continue to push the appeal of the court decision that a business owned by a common carrier, say Yahoo! owned by Verizon, would share that common carrier's exemption from FTC oversight, creating an enforcement gap over online privacy.

Related: Facebook to Prioritize Trusted News

Simons said he fully expected the Ninth Circuit to overturn that ruling and said it would be a "great idea" to get rid of the common carrier exemption altogether. The other nominees nodded their agreement.Simons said the FTC, if it gets back its authority in the internet space--the FCC rule rollback has not taken effect yet, and is eyeing challenged in court--it will be a vigorous enforcer. He said he did not what types of uncompetitive, unfair or deceptive practices would come up in terms of internet conduct, but if it did the FTC could reach it under statute, and if something came up that it could not reach, he would come talk to the committee.

Markey said the FTC lacked rulemaking authority to block blocking, throttling or paid prioritization, while the FCC had it. Simons said they both had rulemaking authority, just different types. Markey pressed him on the point, but Simons said he would want to talk to the General Counsel's office before saying it did not have rulemaking authority in those areas. "I'm not entirely clear."

Related: FTC Settles with Web Site Over Kids Data Collection

Simons tried to elaborate, but Markey cut him off to move to marketing to children, another of his signature issues. Each commissioner committed to "an active, pro-child, privacy protection policy." Markey said it was time to hold companies accountable.

Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), ranking member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee Communications Subcommittee, said he will propose using the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to overturn the FCC's rollback of net-neutrality rules if FCC chair Ajit Pai does not stand down.

That is the legislative maneuver Republicans used to invalidate a number of Obama-era regs earlier this year, including the repeal of the broadband privacy rules established under the Tom Wheeler-led FCC.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) Tuesday (Dec. 12) called on Congress to step in, as well, to resolve the net-neutrality regulation debate, but not that way.

“The answer to monopolies has always been regulation and competition, and as much as some of the FCC commissioners don’t want to acknowledge it, net neutrality and the regulation of ISPs under Title II are essential for providing real competition in the broadband marketplace," Doyle said.

Doyle said he and dozens of other legislators would be sending a letter Wednesday (Dec. 13) urging Pai not to repeal the regs, but that if the FCC does so Dec. 14, as planned, Doyle would introduce the CRA-based legislation.

It is essentially a shot across the bow since the Republicans controlling Congress are fans of the reg rollback. Republicans did use the CRA to reverse the FCC's vote, under Pai's Democratic predecessor, on a broadband privacy framework.

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) has called on the FCC to better use midband spectrum for commercial service.

In a letter to FCC chair Ajit Pai, Thune said that was one way to keep pace with a world turning toward 5G.

Thune said that while the FCC has been freeing up low-band spectrum and high-band, he said the same could not be said for mid-band.

He said he was pleased that the FCC could be considering opening a new proceeding to identify new spectrum in a “range of bands," and encouraged it to look at mid-band frequencies, including 3.7 GHz to 6 GHz.

Thune has introduced legislation, the MOBILE Now Act, which would make sure that the FCC made mid-band spectrum available for commercial use by 2020. He said he hoped that would pass, but suggested the FCC should not wait for that legislative imprimatur.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, took to the Senate floor to say it was time to put the fear-mongering aside and protect the open internet with bipartisan legislation, the kind of legislation Thune said he had offered but then-chair Tom Wheeler rejected.

That came just before the FCC was to vote on the proposal to roll back Title II classification.

Thune said there are many upset about how FCC chair Ajit Pai is proceeding with the Title II rollback — just as Thune was when the FCC reclassified under Title II when he previously suggested legislation was the better route.

Thune said the vote to start the Title II rollback did not create certainty for the Internet and that there was more work to do. He said there was an opportunity for Congress to provide clear rules of the road for the Internet after talking with all stakeholders.

"My preference would be to begin bipartisan work on a bill without further delay," Thune said, adding that he would be happy to meet with any of his colleagues.

Hill Dems have signaled that such bipartisan legislation could be a tough sell, particularly given how they see Republicans dealing with issues like healthcare.

Related: Dems Take to Senate Floor to Slam Title II Vote

For example, House Energy & Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) said at a pro-Title II rally when asked if there were some legislative compromise on net-neutrality rules that there was no reason to believe the Republicans would support substantive protections.

"The well is already poisoned," Pallone said.

Thune’s entire statement is reprinted below:
Mr. President, The internet worked great in 2014 when there were no federal net neutrality rules.

Truth be told, even after the Obama-era Federal Communications Commission applied Depression-era phone monopoly regulations to broadband in 2015, most Americans likely saw little or no difference in their internet experience.

The internet still creates jobs, expands educational opportunities, keeps us in touch with loved ones, and – as a bonus – it’s often really entertaining.

This internet that we know and love isn’t going to fall apart anytime soon no matter what the FCC decides. But there are important policy questions that need to be answered about how the internet will grow and develop into the future.

So let’s put the apocalyptic rhetoric and fear mongering aside.

The internet doesn’t belong to just Republicans, Democrats, big Silicon Valley tech companies, internet service providers, small Silicon Prairie start-ups, or the federal government.

It belongs to everyone – it is global – and it is best when it is free and open.

Today, as the FCC reconsiders the flawed broadband regulations it issued only two years ago, Congress should look back at the path we could have taken but didn’t.

In November 2014, I offered former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler an opportunity for Democrats and Republicans to come together to craft a permanent legislative solution banning controversial practices known as blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization of internet traffic.

With colleagues in the House of Representatives, I even put forward a draft bill doing exactly that. It wasn’t a final offer, but rather an outreach to get the conversation started.

I thought the time and opportunity to protect the open internet on a bipartisan basis had arrived.

Through bipartisan legislation, I believed Congress should put into statute widely-accepted principles of network management, commonly called “net neutrality.”

Our idea for legislation was straightforward: combine protections ensuring that owners of broadband infrastructure can’t use their role to manipulate the user experience with those guaranteeing a continuation of the light-touch regulatory policies that helped the internet thrive for two decades.

But Chairman Wheeler rejected our idea for bipartisan legislation. Instead, he and his staff lobbied to block such discussions from happening in Congress.

He then, with only partisan support, issued an order that gave the FCC authority to regulate the internet under old laws designed for phone monopolies and simultaneously removed all authority the Federal Trade Commission had to police broadband providers.

I represent, South Dakota, a rural state that is home to some small, but still very innovative technology businesses. But in other parts of the state, communities lack access to high-speed broadband.

In the debate over the FCC regulating broadband with rules designed for phone monopolies, there were many concerns that Chairman Wheeler’s approach would create uncertainty that “chills investment.”

Chilling investment” is a term one often hears among the business community. To me, what it really means is that many Americans in rural communities will have to wait longer before they have an opportunity to select high-speed internet service.

Today, there are 34 million Americans who lack access to broadband services at home.

As innovation on the internet thrives, demand for data rises, and the stock market hits all-time highs, one would have expected broadband investment to continue growing as it had for two decades.

‘But according to one analysis, annual investment actually went down 5.5 percent in 2016 compared to 2014.

This is a troubling sign that private investment may be having second thoughts about the ability to turn capital expenditures into future profits under an excessive regulatory regime.

Chairman Wheeler assured the public that his FCC would not use new authority over the internet to aggressively restrict many regular online practices.

But he could not offer assurances that, as years pass and administrations change, such regulatory restraint would remain.

His order gives wide legal latitude for any future FCC – not bound by his commitments – to touch any and every corner of the internet.

After all, unless grounded in legislation, partisan policy changes through administrative action can be fleeting.

Today’s action at the FCC aptly underscores the concern that the FCC’s partisan approach to internet policy in 2015 did not put the internet on a solid foundation.

I know that many are upset about what the FCC is doing. I felt much the same way two years ago when the FCC voted to proceed after my bipartisan outreach had been rejected.

We should not, however, view the FCC’s action today as a final outcome. While I commend Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioner Mike O’Rielly for taking this necessary step, I fully recognize that today’s action alone does not create ideal certainty for the internet. There is more work yet to do.

In politics, it is rare to get a second chance at bipartisan compromise, yet right now we have an opportunity to accomplish what eluded us two years ago—clear and certain rules in statute to protect the open internet.

We have another chance to sit down, to discuss every stakeholder’s concerns, and to work toward the common goal of protecting the internet.

While the FCC’s 2015 order may soon be consigned to the dustbin of history, the last few months have shown that political winds can and often do shift suddenly.

To my colleagues in both the majority and minority, the only way to truly provide legal and political certainty for open internet protections is for Congress to pass bipartisan legislation.

We need a statute offering clear and enduring rules that balance innovation and investment throughout the entire internet ecosystem.

In crafting rules, we need to listen to the concerns of all Americans who support an open internet but who may have differing opinions about the greatest threats to online freedom.

For some Americans, the greatest concern is meddling by internet service providers, and for others it is unelected bureaucrats attempting to “overprotect” Americans from products and services they actually like.

Online innovation is a virtuous circle—online companies need robust and widely available broadband networks to reach their customers, and internet service providers need the online experience to be compelling enough to drive subscriber demand.

We need to work together, collaboratively to find the right policies for the internet.

I firmly believe we can find common ground to protect the internet so long as we don’t fixate on the misguided notion that monopoly regulation is the only way to preserve it.

While some may wish to wait until the activities at the FCC and in the courts have completely run their course, my preference would be to begin bipartisan work on such legislation without any further delay. Innovation and job creation should no longer take a backseat to partisan point-scoring. It is time for Congress to finally settle this matter. I am happy to meet at any time with any of my colleagues who are serious about discussing a path forward.

I would also welcome discussing any new open internet proposals from my colleagues that balance the need for both innovation and investment.

There was quite a divergence in the handicapping of the new FCC chairman--Ajit Pai--by the chair and ranking member of the Senate Commerce Committee.

That came in opening statements for the Senate Commerce Committee FCC oversight hearing, the first in that committee in six years Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) pointed out, adding: "A lot has changed since then."

"The FCC’s first actions under Chairman Pai were to make much needed reforms to improve the agency’s processes and transparency," said Thune. "Counter to the trend of Chairman Pai’s recent predecessors, who often sought to amass as much power in the chairman’s office as they could, these simple steps instead empower the public and the other commissioners."

As to the chairman's early moves to roll back some of his predecessor's regs, Thune was also pleased. "While I am sure there are other actions that may need to be revisited, I do think we need to hit reset on both of these items.  And I’m glad to see the FCC has already started that process by staying certain parts of the rules that were set to go into effect last week."

When it was Nelson's turn, he painted a much different picture, praising Pai's Democratic predecessor, who he said had had consumers' backs, and saying Pai had, in only a few weeks--Pai took over Jan. 23: 

1) Acted to prevent millions of broadband subscribers from receiving key information about the rates, terms, and conditions of their service; 2) Acted to guarantee that broadband subscribers will have less protections with respect to the security of their online data, while promising to further weaken the duties broadband providers owe to protect the web browsing history and other personal information of their paying subscribers; 3)Threatened the expansion of broadband into the homes of low-income Americans by limiting the effectiveness of new Lifeline program reforms; and 4) formally rescinded an FCC staff report detailing the implementation of the agency’s comprehensive E-Rate modernization effort," an effort Nelson said "sent shock waves through schools and the libraries across the nation."

Separately, a dozen Democratic Senators, including members of the committee, wrote Pai this week urging him to preserve the program.

Roslyn Layton, who was a member of the Trump FCC transition team, agreed with Thune.

“Today’s oversight hearing confirms the new FCC, under the leadership of Chairman Pai, is finally prioritizing greater economic competitiveness and support for the everyday American consumer," she said in a statement following the hearing. "By bringing economics and consumers back to the central focus of the agency, the chairman and commissioners are encouraging bipartisanship and practical rulemakings that will allow our burgeoning U.S. telecommunications sector to reach new levels of competition and innovation.”

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), ranking member of the Senate Commerce Committee, said Wednesday at the opening of an FCC oversight hearing that he was frustrated that former Democratic commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel was not in attendance.

All three sitting FCC commissioners -- chairman Ajit Pai, Michael O'Rielly and Mignon Clyburn -- were present to testify at the hearing.

Rosenworcel exited at the end of the year after her renomination was not voted by the full Senate.

Democrats had said they had Republican leadership's promise that Rosenworcel would get a vote after they agreed to vote out the nomination of Republican Michael O'Rielly without pairing it with hers, as is the usual process.

"The failure to confirm her [in the] last Congress, frankly, is a black mark on the Senate," Nelson said.

President Donald Trump last week pulled Rosenworcel's nomination.

"I can only hope that the White House will see the error of its ways and renominate this impressive public servant for another FCC term once again," Nelson said. "And if that happens as it should, it is imperative for the Senate leadership to live up to its promise and confirm her nomination with all dispatch."

Commerce committee chairman Sen. John Thune (R.-S.D.) agreed that the FCC needed to be at a full complement of five commissioners and also pointed out at the hearing that Democrat Mignon Clyburn's term is up in June (though she could serve until the end of the Congress after this one).

Thune said he shared Nelson's interest in getting nominations approved, and would commit to a speedy process, though he did not explicitly cite Rosenworcel.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) echoed Nelson's sentiments, saying that he was disappointed in Rosenworcel's nomination was being pulled, said he was counting on everyone to honor their commitments, and suggested pairing

her nomination with Pai's renomination was a way to speed both nominations to approval.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) also put in a plug for Rosenworcel, joking that she was someone whose name was even harder to pronounce than her own.

The Senate Commerce Committee has favorably reported out the MOBILE Now Act, which promotes freeing up unlicensed spectrum for wireless, and the Federal Communications Commission Consolidated Reporting Act, which consolidates eight FCC reports into a single survey of marketplace competitiveness.

Commerce Secretary nominee Wilbur Ross was also favorably reported out of the Senate Commerce Committee Tuesday by unanimous voice vote.

Committee chairman John Thune called those and other bills on the docket—which had been introduced in previous Congresses but had not made it into a law—a "clean-up" agenda before the committee starts tackling new legislation.

The bills now head to the Senate floor. The House Monday (Jan. 23) passed its version of the FCC consolidated reports bill.

Also reported favorably to the full senate was the DIGIT Act. The bill, which was introduced in the last Congress, would "convene a working group of federal entities that would consult with private sector stakeholders to provide recommendations to Congress." Those would include how to encourage the growth of IoT, seeking input from the private sector to help prevent "regulatory silos."

It would also direct the FCC to launch a proceeding on the spectrum needs of IoT.

"I’m pleased that the Committee advanced the MOBILE NOW Act to support 5G spectrum and streamlined deployment, especially in rural and hard-to-reach areas, including federal lands," said Competitive Carriers Association President Steven K. Berry following the Committee's executive meeting.

"The MOBILE NOW Act will help our future by allocating additional spectrum for commercial use by 2020," said Consumer Technology Association President Gary Shapiro. This will create better mobile broadband for consumers and is critical to the success of future innovations, including the development of the next generation of cellular 5G technologies.  

“The MOBILE NOW Act promotes the efficient use of Federal spectrum, while freeing up significant bandwidth for both commercial licensed and unlicensed use," said Phillip Berenbroick, senior policy counsel at Public Knowledge. "The bill’s unanimous advancement further demonstrates the overwhelming consensus that unlicensed spectrum and democratized access to the public airwaves are key drivers to economic growth and innovation."

“Particularly as our nation looks to promote advanced communications, it will become more critical than ever to ensure the availability of sufficient spectrum and facilitate the ability to install robust wireline and wireless facilities capable of handling the vastly increased consumer demands that such services enable,” said NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association chief executive Shirley Bloomfield. “Therefore, NTCA applauds the aim of MOBILE NOW to streamline the deployment of communications facilities and expand the definition of the types of infrastructure covered by the streamlined process."

Ranking member Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) said he and his Democratic colleagues will unveil a "robust blueprint to rebuild America's infrastructure proposal at noon Tuesday. He said it would invest a trillion dollars and create 15 million jobs. It will almost certainly also include a broadband component.

President Donald Trump has said he wants to invest a trillion dollars in an infrastructure remake.

The Senate Commerce Committee has released the findings of an FCC Inspector General (IG) report into the leak of information surrounding a failed compromise on Lifeline reform between Republican commissioners Ajit Pai and Michael O'Rielly and Democrat Mignon Clyburn.

The report concludes that FCC chairman Tom Wheeler did authorize "the release of the fact that a compromise order with a cap on Lifeline [might] be on the agenda," but that that was within his right as the chairman to change the nature of the information from nonpublic to public.

The conduct was neither improper nor illegal, but unusual, the IG said.

The report also concluded that the chairman did not authorize the disclosure of the amount of the cap on the fund, and "found no evidence that the information was provided to the press in an attempt to unduly influence the outcome of the vote."

FCC Communications Director Shannon Gilson explained to the IG that "throughout the morning of March 31st, the FCC Office of Media Relations had been inundated with calls from the press and that it was clear many reporters and stakeholders were already aware a deal was being crafted by Commissioner Clyburn and the Republican commissioners. Thus, because she felt it would be beneficial to get the story out accurately, Gilson sought and received authorization from Wheeler and Milkman to provide the press with high level details."

"The IG report found that the Chairman properly used his authority to make public certain information about the changing state of play regarding the Lifeline Order," said FCC press secretary Kim Hart. "The report also found that he did so in response to intense media interest in the item and to ensure accurate information was being reported, not to improperly influence another Commissioner as has been alleged."

An FCC official speaking on background called it "curious" that Wheeler staffers had very clear recollections of what happened the morning of the meeting, while staff in "other offices" could not recall details about their conversations with reporters.

Then there was the fact that while the IG found the chairman had not authorized the leak of the amount of the cap, it got out anyway.

“The findings by the inspector general reveal significant dysfunction and a lack of transparency at the FCC,” said Commerce Chairman Sen. John Thune. “Under the agency’s current interpretation, the FCC chairman is free to leak cherry-picked details about proceedings and deliberations while other commissioners are gagged and even kept in the dark about decisions by the chairman to approve such leaks. Worse yet, the FCC is not keeping a record of decisions by the chairman to disclose non-public information. This report is yet another indication of increased partisanship and dysfunction at the FCC that underscores the need for Congress to reform how the agency does business.”

Thune last April sought the investigation into how a compromise Lifeline proposal fell apart and what role the possible disclosure by the FCC of nonpublic information played in that process.

Wheeler had proposed a soft cap of $2.25 billion on the low-income Lifeline advanced telecommunications subsidy, which the FCC is migrating to broadband. That would have been an extra $750 million in spending and even that could be exceeded if necessary. Republicans were looking for a cap and the compromise was $2 billion and no going over that unless the FCC commissioners vote to raise it.

In a letter to Wheeler back in April, Thune said events surrounding the FCC's March 31 meeting, at which the Lifeline proposal was voted, raised "new questions about the Commission's policies for the disclosure of nonpublic information."

In launching the investigation, Thune said the delays were "highly unusual -- they certainly were for the generally punctual Wheeler commission -- and cited media reports, including Multichannel News/Broadcasting & Cable stories, about the compromise and the delay.

Thune said the leaks of info appeared "designed to engage outside interest groups to disrupt the deal struck between the Republican Commissioners and Commissioner Clyburn.

The March 31 meeting was delayed for over three hours after the Republican-backed compromise was struck and then fell apart after commissioner Clyburn decided she could not support a cap on the Lifeline fund, which subsidizes advanced telecom to low-income residents. The FCC is migrating the fund to broadband, but ultimately voted not to cap the fund, though approaching the $2.25 billion allocation would trigger a review of the fund.

How she came to that conclusion was what the Republicans wanted to know.

The Lifeline vote was 3-2, and particularly contentious, with the Republicans complaining about the collapse of the deal and laying blame at Wheeler's feet, suggesting he had tried to get stakeholders opposed to the cap to submarine the deal of which he was not a part. Wheeler has said there was no such strategy to kneecap the compromise, and the suggestion that there was "balderdash."

The effort by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) to pass the Mobile Now Act by unanimous consent (UC), or at least to make the senator blocking it own that process, has been postponed.

There is a hold on the bill -- it takes only one senator to place a hold -- and by making the UC request, the member, or at least a member, would have to stand up and object to passage to continue the hold.

Thune had planned to take the floor Wednesday (Sept. 21) and call for that vote, but his office said the request was postponed.

The Mobile Now Act would take numerous steps to boost wireless broadband, including licensed and unlicensed. It passed unanimously out of the Senate Commerce Committee in March loaded with amendments on everything from shot-clocks for approving facilities to dig-once policies for combining road projects and telecom plant, to a contest offering up to $5 million for the first person to come up with a way to boost spectrum efficiency.

The bipartisan bill, which specifically targets the buildout of 5G mobile broadband, was the result of months of negotiations.

“The committee’s advancement of the Mobile Now Act was truly a bipartisan effort,” Thune said following the markup. “Enactment of this legislation will pave the way to a 5G future where Americans have access to ultra-fast, next-generation wireless technology.”

Included in the bill was an amendment backed by, among others, wireless broadband spectrum fan Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) that would ensure at least 100 MHz of the spectrum being freed up would go for unlicensed use and another 100 MHz for commercial mobile service, with a handwritten addition to the amendment saying that commercial use was "subject to the [FCC's] regulatory purview to implement exclusive licensing in a flexible manner, including consideration of continued use of such spectrum by incumbent federal or non-federal entities in designated geographic areas indefinitely."

Among the reasons for the tough negotiations on the bill were the tensions between licensed and unlicensed, as well as commercial and incumbent government users of the spectrum. Ranking member Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) said he thought the bill had struck the right balance among those.

Not included in the bill was a last-minute amendment that would have helped broadcasters in the post-incentive auction repack and an FCC process reform bill amendment from Sen. Den Heller.

Also not included was a bill, introduced by a bipartisan group of senators, that would direct the FCC to identify the spectrum requirements for the growing Internet of things (IoT) and study the impacts of connected technologies

The Senate Commerce Committee has scheduled a Federal Trade Commission oversight hearing.

The office of the committee's chairman, John Thune (R-S.D.), announced that the hearing will be Sept. 27 at 10 a.m.

Look for broadband privacy to be a hot topic of conversation. Committee Republicans have been pushing the FCC to take a page from the FTC's privacy oversight and focus on tailoring broadband privacy to the sensitivity of information, and to adopt an opt-out, rather than opt-in, regime for information sharing, which has been the FTC's approach.

Just last week, the major ISPs called on the committee to drill down on the FCC proposal.

The FCC inherited oversight of broadband privacy from the FTC when it reclassified ISPs as common carriers, which the FTC is excluded from regulating under the false and deceptive authority the FTC uses.

Related:Court Decision Raises Edge Provider Regulation Issues

There could also be questions about the recent court decision that called into question whether buying a common carrier could insulate edge providers from FTC privacy regulatory authority.

Senate Commerce Committee chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) had said Thursday (Sept. 15) that his was going to be a hard-hitting opening statement for the committee's FCC oversight hearing. He was not overstating the case.

Thune took aim at FCC chairman Tom Wheeler, accusing him of using information as a partisan weapon. He cited 25 3-2 FCC votes under Wheeler, noting that was far more than the 14 total 3-2 votes over the previous 20 years.

Wheeler pointed out that 90% of the votes were unanimous and also said at least a couple of 3-2 votes were not along party lines, citing the effective competition vote, for one, where he teamed with the two Republicans. But Thune said he was referring to public meeting votes, which the effective competition vote was not.

"Why does the current FCC continually advance divisive policies at the expense of certainty for consumers and innovators that only bipartisan solutions can offer?" Thune asked rhetorically.

"Too often, we have seen conveniently-timed leaks and disclosures used as tools to benefit the partisan agenda," he added. "Treating all commissioners fairly and not using the disclosure of nonpublic information as a sword would lead to a better process at the agency, which in turn could only improve the commission’s work product. While process issues at the FCC may seem to be just a minor transgression that can be chalked up to business as usual in Washington, D.C., in this case it illustrates a divisive leadership approach, which threatens to undermine the credibility of the agency now and into the future."

Sen. Bill Nelson in his opening statement suggested that the commission reflected the "highly charged partisan times" in Washington. He said administrative agencies "often reflect the times in which they are holding their hearings and votes."

Thune conceded that the committee also represents deeply held differences, but that its members try to find consensus, and he hopes the FCC takes a similar approach. Nelson agreed that the committee has been able to cut through partisanship on "issue after issue."

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler told the Senate Thursday that he is still open to changes in the FCC's new app-based set-top plan. That came in response, as well as in advance of, concerns expressed by various legislators.

In a Senate Commerce Committee oversight hearing, Wheeler said that they were probably "90%" there on the set-top box item and cited at least one provision -- on contracts between programmers and MVPDs that he said programmers had sought -- that he is willing to pull out if it helps.

Democratic Sens. Bill Nelson (Fla.), Claire McCaskill (Mo.) and Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) all expressed concerns, including Klobuchar about the impact of the proposal on independent programmers. Wheeler countered to Klobuchar that the Writers Guild of America West backed the plan and its impact on independent programmers and that others independents did as well.

Related: Sen. Nelson: Set-Top Plan Needs Work

McCaskill said that she had rarely seen such unanimous criticism of an item, suggesting that signaled that more work clearly needed to be done.

At the hearing, Wheeler quoted Rosenworcel's comment about the need to act on set-tops for consumers. But when asked for her take about the set-top plan, Rosenworcel said that that while set-tops were clunky and expensive -- she said that was her personal as well as professional position -- she had problems with the FCC getting "too involved in licensing schemes" adding that she did not think the FCC had the authority.

Rosenworcel's vote will be needed to approve the item, since the Republicans oppose it in its current form.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) pressed Wheeler on his openness to modifying the proposal to address what he said were stakeholder's legitimate concerns. Wheeler said he was, so long as it stays true ot the congressional mandate -- to create navigation device competition.

Standing up for Wheeler's proposal was Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.). He held up a set-top wrapped in chains and compared that with an Amazon fire stick the size of a pack of gum.

He said the box had not changed and that 100 million pay TV households can't watch their pay programming on the Fire stick.

He said only the FCC can do something about the problem, and that its proposal would free consumers from exorbitant rental fees. "That lack of choice has to end now, Markey said.

Markey asked if Wheeler could find a solution in the next 14 days. Wheeler said he hoped the "significant departure" from structure but not principle that the new apps-based proposal represents, is an indication of how he is willing and seeking to resolve remaining concerns, while chopping the chains from the box.

Wheeler said Comcast is shipping 40,000 of those (chained) boxes a day.

Sen. John Thune (D-S.D.) pointed out that Amazon had registered its own problems with the proposal. He quoted their comment that the proposal would delay competition.

Markey said that was a concern about licensing, and that the licensing board issue could be worked out.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who teamed with Markey to push for set-top reform, also said his state's consumers would stand to save millions of dollars from the FCC set-top proposal.

He said the proposal would simply enforce a law that has been unenforced since the 1990's. He called it a classic inside-the-Beltway vs. consumer issue and labelled set-tops "dollar devourers."

But one industry source pointed out that the law also prevents the FCC from doing some things that the proposal's critics say it would do, per below:

"The Commission shall not prescribe regulations under subsection (a) of this section which would jeopardize security of multichannel video programming and other services offered over multichannel video programming systems, or impede the legal rights of a provider of such services to prevent theft of service."

Republican leaders in Congress are dropping broad hints that it's time (once again) to try to overhaul the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which has been increasingly burdened by legal challenges to FCC decisions (most recently and notably, net neutrality) as well as by dramatic  issues such as privacy and cybersecurity.

Senate Commerce Committee chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) said, "It’s time for Congress to be heard from again,” according to a report this week in the congressional newspaper, The Hill.

“There are way more moving parts now than there were back then,” Thune told the newspaper.

President Bill Clinton signed the 1996 Telecom Act into law on Feb. 8 of that year (see photo).

Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) and  Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), both of whom are considering a bid to chair the House Energy and Commerce Committee next year, agree that a telecom rewrite is overdue. Walden now chairs the E&C Communications and Technology subcommittee; Shimkus chairs its Environment and the Economy subcommittee and is a member of the Communications and Technology group.  

“You want to do a blank slate," Shimkus told The Hill.  He envisions starting the process by assuming "there’s no FCC, but we have the communication devices" and legislators have to create a regulatory ecosystem. Shimkus contended that the '96 law is not suited to today’s technology, calling that tech/law gap an incentive to update the Act.

“I’ve got to believe that’s compelling,” he said. “It shouldn’t be threatening. In fact, you should encourage the FCC to be involved.”

All speculation about Telecom Act reform in the 115th Congress is, of course, uncertain in today's volatile political environment. Control of the Senate may change, and the balance of power in the House may narrow.

Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the House communications subcommittee, told The Hill that the process may depend on who chairs the full Commerce committee and "what kind of leadership and ...  vision [about] what needs to be done across the communications and technology sectors."

Telecom reform legislation has been bruited around Capitol Hill for nearly a decade, with prior Commerce Committee chairs acknowledging the need for updates in the volatile tech/telecom environment. Efforts to seek agreement between the legacy communications providers, including cable as well as telephone companies, and Silicon Valley upstarts have foiled many of the plans. Turf wars are also likely, as the FCC and Federal Trade Commission jurisdictions overlap on issues such as privacy and security. Not to mention the role of military/security concerns in the evolving spectrum wars.

An ambitious effort for a rewrite by House Republican three years ago floundered, and the next attempt will have to delve into the unchartered worlds of the Internet of Things and other applications that were barely in the lexicon early in the Obama administration.

As Thune acknowledged in The Hill report, the term "Internet" barely appears in the 1996 Act, even though the World Wide Web was well underway at that time.

"It’s a whole different world" now, Thune said. "We think that the policies, the regulations, that apply to the industry today need to be updated, need to be modernized.”

Yet finding consensus may be much more challenging than in prior years. Many analysts have pointed to the wider-than-ever range of organizations now touched by FCC rules, making it harder to find agreement. There has been considerable talk about separate updates of the telecom and media portions of the law, but that approach is increasingly difficult as the convergence of the two worlds (Comcast-NBCU and AT&T-DirecTV exemplify the situation) expands and rules affect all sectors of the telecom arena.

Not to mention the roles of non-traditional media providers such as Google and Amazon.

While the next leadership of pertinent Congressional units is unknown, the issue of telecom reform -- complex as it is -- is being positioned as a priority objective for the 115th Congress. It's just not clear how "high" a priority it will become.

Senate Commerce Committee chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) took to the Senate floor Thursday (July 7) to criticize the FCC and its chairman over alleged disclosure of nonpublic information. 

In a lengthy speech, Thune said independent agencies need to be accountable to the people but that in recent years the FCC has been behaving more like a de facto arm of the executive branch "wholly subservient to the President" than an independent agency reporting to Congress. President Obama has publicly pressed for Title II reclassification and "unlocking" the set-top box, both FCC hot topics.

Thune also talked about the recent partisanship at the agency, which he attributed to "an institution that has seized regulatory power while simultaneously shutting down bipartisan dialog and compromise."

As examples he cited the FCC's Lifeline reform, "backward looking" set-top box proposal, "power grab of stunning proportions" of new Title II-based net-neutrality rules, broadband privacy "power grab" and other actions, which he said had all been characterized by a lack of respect for the limits of the FCC's authority as delegated by Congress.

He called that a downward trajectory for the agency and blamed FCC chairman Tom Wheeler.

Thune said Wheeler had "embraced" partisanship over compromise. He also said the chairman exercises his powers with neither humility nor a light touch. Thune particularly took aim at what he suggested was selectively leaking nonpublic information, counter to FCC rules.

Thune cited the FCC's March 31 open meeting to illustrate selective leaks in service of his general "power grab" theme. That was the FCC's vote on Lifeline reform, which included the collapse of a compromise between the two Republican commissioners and Democrat Mignon Clyburn.

The compromise was reported by various outlets, including Multichannel News, prior to the delayed meeting start. It ultimately fell through over Clyburn's decision that she could not support a cap on the Lifeline subsidy.

Thune said Wheeler was trying to exempt himself from the rule preventing disclosure of nonpublic information by selectively leaking information about the compromise. Thune said the result of the leak was that "the story spurred outside political pressure against the emerging bipartisan compromise, which subsequently fell apart" to be replaced by a party-line vote on the chairman's proposal, which did not have the cap Republicans favored.

The chairman’s office had no comment, but Wheeler has explained his position in a letter to Thune.

The senator said that, when pressed, the chairman would not say whether he had authorized the leak. Thune said Wheeler did answer that he was "empowered to do anything that streamlines the FCC's work." Thune called that a "specious" attempt to exempt the chairman from a clear FCC rule.

The senator said Wheeler was using the rule against disclosure of nonpublic information as both a shield and a sword, saying he was free to share such information, but suggesting Republican Ajit Pai had actually done so in violation of the rule.

The FCC Inspector General is currently investigating the leak, and Thune said he is looking forward to the findings.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, wants some answers from Facebook about its alleged manipulation of trending stories to suppress conservative news, including what Facebook is doing to investigate the claims.

Facebook says the allegations, in a May 9 Gizmodo story, are false, but Thune followed up on the report with a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

“Facebook must answer these serious allegations and hold those responsible to account if there has been political bias in the dissemination of trending news,” said Thune on sending the letter. “Any attempt by a neutral and inclusive social media platform to censor or manipulate political discussion is an abuse of trust and inconsistent with the values of an open Internet," said Thune in a statement.

Thune wants the answers to the following by May 24.

1) "Please describe Facebook’s organizational structure for the Trending Topics feature, and the steps for determining included topics.  Who is ultimately responsible for approving its content?

2) "Have Facebook news curators in fact manipulated the content of the Trending Topics section, either by targeting news stories related to conservative views for exclusion or by injecting non-trending content?

3) "What steps is Facebook taking to investigate claims of politically motivated manipulation of news stories in the Trending Topics section?  If such claims are substantiated, what steps will Facebook take to hold the responsible individuals accountable?

4) "In a statement responding to the allegations, Facebook has claimed to have “rigorous guidelines in place for the review team” to prevent “the suppression of political perspectives” or the “prioritization of one viewpoint over another or one news outlet over another.”

a. "When did Facebook first introduce these guidelines?

b. "Please provide a copy of these guidelines, as well as any changes or amendments since January 2014.

c. 'Does Facebook provide training for its employees related to these guidelines?  If so, describe what the training consists of, as well as its frequency.

d.  "How does Facebook determine compliance with these guidelines?  Does it conduct audits?  If so, how often?  What steps are taken when a violation occurs?

5) "Does Facebook maintain a record of curators’ decisions to inject a story into the Trending Topics section or target a story for removal?  If such a record is not maintained, can such decisions be reconstructed or determined based on an analysis of the Trending Topics product?

a. "If so, how many stories have curators excluded that represented conservative viewpoints or topics of interest to conservatives? How many stories did curators inject that were not, in fact, trending?

b. Please provide a list of all news stories removed from or injected into the Trending Topics section since January 2014."

Two ranking members of Senate committees, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) of the Commerce Committee and Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) of the Communications Subcommittee, Wednesday called again for a vote on the nomination of Democratic FCC commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel to a new term.

They were joined by Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.).

While the Commerce Committee unanimously recommended her for a new term, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has yet to schedule a floor vote.

During what proved to be a bipartisan vote on an FCC reauthorization bill, Schatz said that was a fly in that bipartisan ointment. He said the Senate needs to do its job, and Nelson echoed that.

He pointed out, as had Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid in a floor statement two weeks ago, that McConnell had promised a vote when Democrats agreed to vote out Republican Mike O'Rielly last year. In a tradition that dates back to the Clinton Administration, Republican congressional leaders essentially get to pick Republican commissioners and Democratic leaders the Democrats.

Markey said he had planned to put a hold on O'Rielly's nomination but got "complete" assurances from Reid, who had gotten assurances from McConnell, that Rosenworcel would get a vote. Here we are now in April and no vote, he said, adding that he never would have relinquished his hold without the assurances from Republicans. He called on them to expedite the process and give her the "honor" of  being reconfirmed.

Rosenworcel's term has already expired, but she can serve until December.

Republican Commerce Committee chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) said the committee had done its job by reporting her out favorably for a vote, and that it was now up to the two Senate leaders. "We have done our part at this level to move it forward," he said.

Sen. Commerce Committee chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) said he plans to introduce a bill in the next few days, the FCC Reauthorization Act of 2016, to do what its name suggests.

Authorization bills establish, or reestablish as in this case, a federal agency, including the terms under which it operates and how funds may be spent.

As a result, the bill could be a vehicle for FCC reforms.

Thune pointed out in an FCC oversight hearing Wednesday (March 2) that the agency has not been reauthorized in a quarter century, the longest such gap for any agency the committee oversees.

He said it was the committee's responsibility to reauthorize the agency for the sake of its constituents, who are increasingly affected "by a regulatory agency with a nearly half a billion dollar budget."

"It is time for this committee to regularly reauthorize the agency as a part of its regular business," Thune said.

Thune added that he intends to mark up the bill, amend it if necessary and vote on it if possible in the next few weeks.

The Senate Commerce Committee has scheduled a March 3 mark-up for the Mobile Now (Making Opportunities for Broadband Investment and Limiting Excessive and Needless Obstacles to Wireless) Act.

Senate Commerce Committee chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) and ranking member Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) two weeks ago introduced the bill. 

A committee mark-up is an executive session at which bills are debated, amended and, if all goes well, approved for consideration by, in this case, the full Senate.

Among the bill highlights are: (1) making a statutory mandate the President's 2010 executive order that the government make 500 MHz of federal spectrum available for private use by 2020; (2) speeding up the placement of wireless structures on federal property; (3) assessing spectrum in the 3 GHz and millimeter wave bands -- mostly in the millimeter wave bands -- for the feasibility of authorizing licensed or unlicensed broadband services, and if feasible which is best suited; (4) encouraging "dig once" policies that place broadband conduit when below-ground projects like highway constructions are undertaken; (5) creating a central online inventory of federal government assets available for private-sector broadband deployment; (6) requiring the Commerce Department to issue a report within 18 months on what other legislative or regulatory levers could be moved to push federal entities to relinquish or share spectrum; and (7) allowing spectrum relocation fund balances to be transferred to agencies for transition efforts immediately after an auction rather than after actual receipt of the funds.

The bill has been in the works for a while, but was pulled from a Nov. 18 markup because committee members, notably Democrats but also Republicans, had not gotten sufficient notice and were not ready to amend and vote out the bill.

Apparently it is now ready for prime committee time.

Senate Commerce Committee chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) said that, in concert with ranking member Bill Nelson (R-Fla.), he is putting the finishing touches on his bill to boost development of 5G wireless broadband service at potentially multiple-gigabit speeds, in competition to cable broadband.

Speaking at a CTIA 5G conference in Washington Tuesday (Feb. 9), Thune said he has been working on a new draft of the Mobile Now (Making Opportunities for Broadband Investment and Limiting Excessive and Needless Obstacles to Wireless) Act, which he hoped to be able to introduce later this week.

The bill has been in the works for a while, but was pulled from a planned markup last fall.

He said the bill would "insure that hundreds of megahertz of spectrum would be made available for commercial use by 2020," which he pointed out was about the same time the 5G standard could be rolled out. He said the bill would "cut through much of the bureaucratic red tape that makes it difficult to build wireless facilities on federal properties." It would also "direct the FCC to streamline regulations affecting small-cell networks."

Thune said that perhaps most importantly, the bill would push the FCC to examine millimeter wave (high-frequency bands) to determine which are most useful for 5 G. He said those would be the most critical for delivering the multi-gigabit high speed broadband service.

He pointed out that Starry is already planning millimeter wave, high-speed wireless broadband service using current gen technology.

Thune talked loftily about the possibilities of high-speed wireless broadband, saying that to him, 5G did not mean as-yet unwritten tech specs, but a not too distant future in which "unbridled activity meets nearly unbounded capacity unlocking limitless possibility."

He suggested the FCC should clear away regulatory obstacles rather than regulate as though wireless were not a growing competitor to wired cable.

But Thune said the days of easy spectrum are over, and that Congress was going to have to do some heavy lifting going forward rather than picking bands of underutilized spectrum and auctioning them for tens of billions of dollars.

He said he could not exaggerate how much more difficult it will be to identify new bands of spectrum for broadband.

Thune said the bill would build on last year’s Spectrum Pipeline Act and that while 5G may be years away, incremental steps toward it must be taken now.

Thune said there is work in the House on a wireless spectrum bill and they should be able to combine those efforts.

One America News Network’s effort to use the government’s merger review of Charter Communications’s purchase of Time Warner Cable to leverage carriage on Charter has gone into hyperdrive, with a little help from an agency process that does not weed out duplicative comments.

A check of the Federal Communications Commission’s comment docket on the deal reveals page after page of people saying the merger should be nixed unless it includes a carriage deal for OANN, or otherwise professing their love for the channel. In fact, at press time the docket had more than 44,000 comments in the last 30 days — more by a factor of 30 than the next most populous proceeding (special access rates at 1,387), fueled in part by the OANN fan club.

But if anyone tries to use the total number of OANN comments as argument for a groundswell of input, it will need to be with a grain or two of salt added. The docket contains numerous double, triple, and in some cases quintuple and sextuple postings of the same comments from the same people, so a total of those pro-OANN carriage comments would not be an accurate gauge.

A top FCC spokesperson signaled the agency takes that mirroring factor into account when vetting the docket. “As with all proceedings, the commission values public participation and takes a careful look at the feedback it receives,” FCC press secretary Kim Hart told The Wire. “In fully assessing the record, commission staff analyzes substantive arguments and accounts for comment patterns and anomalies.”

OANN parent Herring Networks initially praised Charter’s treatment of its networks and independent networks in general, but has since changed its tune, citing the hot-button issue of over-the-top carriage.

Charter does not carry OANN, which Herring has pointedly pointed out to the FCC, saying it was an example of Charter’s unfriendliness to independent networks. But OANN is also not carried by Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox or most other major MVPDs — with the exception of Verizon Communications’s FiOS TV and AT&T’s U-verse TV.

Vyve Pulls Surprise On ‘Spirited’ Artist Who Wins Contest

Vyve Broadband cooked up a fun surprise for 11-year-old Alexander Griffin, who’d entered Vyve’s first Christmas Card Art Contest. System manager Lloyd Walker, wearing a yellow Santa hat, made a surprise announcement at a Dec. 10 assembly at Griffin’s Forge Ridge Elementary School in Harrogate, Tenn., that the fifth grader had won the contest.

Griffin received a gift bag of prizes including an iPad Mini. The school got a check for $200 for art supplies. Students at the school were treated to cookies from a local bakery and hot chocolate. And Vyve partnered with Hallmark to use the artwork as the basis of its Christmas card this year.

More than 500 students in the nine states where Vyve operates submitted images of “The Spirit of Christmas.” Vyve’s New York-based ad agency selected the winner among seven finalists.

Auction Accounting: Who’s Got the Money?

Because The Wire loves arcana, here is some.

The Senate Commerce Committee quietly passed a bill (S. 2319, for fellow arcanians) that made a slight tweak to the Communications Act of 1934 and its 1996 update.

According to a committee staffer familiar with the bill’s progression, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) conferred with the Federal Communications Commission before offering up S. 2319 — it passed the subcommittee unanimously in a wink on Dec. 9 — that would change the way the agency deposits upfront payments from spectrum auction participants.

Payments include those from wireless companies that bid $40 billion-plus in the AWS-3 auction and are expected to bid in the broadcast incentive auction.

The FCC has been putting those payments in an interest-bearing account before turning them over to the Treasury. The interest went to the Telecommunications Development Fund. But the cost of administering that interstitial financial step did not justify continuing it, given how low interests rates are.

Up-front payments from the upcoming incentive auction will now go directly to the Treasury. Some of it will cover buyout bids to broadcasters or moving expenses for stations and cable operators, some of whom will have to retune headends to pick up the repacked TV stations after the auction.

The payments can be in the billions in aggregate. For example, a wireless company that wanted to bid on spectrum blocks in New York and Los Angeles would have to put up more than $1 billion just to be eligible to bid.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, has scheduled a hearing for June 10 on train control technology that will include an FCC witness, Charles Mathias, associate bureau chief of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau.

The deployment of Positive Train Control tech, or PTC, was put in the spotlight after the fatal May 13 Amtrak accident outside Philadelphia; the derailment occurred on a stretch of rail that did not have the technology, which Congress has mandated to be in place by year's end.

"Witnesses have been requested to discuss the capabilities and limitations of train control technologies (including positive train control systems); the current status of the deployment and functionality of positive train control systems; and current challenges with on-going efforts to install, test, and certify positive train control systems by the December 31, 2015, statutory deadline," the committee said in announcing the hearing.

Only hours before the derailment last month, also in a Senate hearing, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler had talked about positive train control, saying the issue has two parts: spectrum and the placement of antennas. He said the FCC had recently eased power restrictions for commuter lines to reduce the number of poles required, and opened up and transferred spectrum, including spectrum to Amtrak in the Northeast corridor.

Wheeler also said that since he had become chairman, the FCC had instituted new procedures such that the agency was able to process more applications for placement of the poles that hold the antennas than the railroads were currently submitting. He said the FCC could now handle 2,800 requests a week, which he said the railroads could not keep pace with.

"I think we are making some real serious progress on PTC," he told the senators that day.

Tom Wheeler won't make public his draft of new open Internet rules before the Feb. 26 meeting, the FCC chairman told the Republican leaders of the House and Senate committees overseeing communications.

"What you have suggested in terms of releasing the preliminary discussion draft of the Order runs contrary to Commission procedure followed over the years by both Democratic and Republican Chairs," he said in a letter dated Feb. 2 obtained by Multichannel News. "If decades of precedent are to be changed, then there must be an opportunity for thoughtful review in the lead up to any change." Wheeler signaled last week that he was unlikely to grant the request, citing the need to go through regular process in order to change regular process.

Wheeler said he would circulate the draft to the commissioners Feb. 5 as planned and they should have the requisite three-week period to discuss the substance of it "in confidence" before the planned Feb. 26 vote. "This is commonplace for administrative agencies and closely resembles the way that appellate courts - including the Supreme Court - hear public argument, confer privately, share their views and review drafts confidentially, and then issue their public decision," he said.

The request to see the draft, which the chairman has said will circulate to the other commissioners Feb. 5 per custom, came in a letter Jan. 22 to Wheeler from House Energy & Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.), Communications Subcommittee chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.), and Senate Commerce Committee chairman John Thune (R-S.D.).

During network neutrality hearings in the House and Senate two weeks ago, those same leaders suggested one advantage of congressional action—they have proposed a bill to clarify FCC authority over Internet access— is that it was on the table for everyone to check out.

"We will continue to hear from interested parties in the run-up to the open meeting, will engage in the normal confidential process of sharing and considering changes to that Order and, of course, will consider and discuss the matter in public at the open meeting," he said.

The letter is reprinted in full below:

Dear Chairmen Thune, Upton, and Walden:

Thank you for your letter regarding the Commission's Open Internet proceeding. I
recognize and appreciate that your Committees are fully engaged on Open Internet issues, which
are of great importance to Congress and the American people. It is critical to preserve an open
Internet.

The Commission's process for considering items like the Open Internet rule is designed
to give stakeholders and members of the public ample opportunity to engage in a transparent and
vigorous discussion. It is also designed to give Commissioners a three-week period to discuss in
confidence the substance of an item before final decisions are released. This is commonplace for
administrative agencies and closely resembles the way that appellate courts - including the
Supreme Court - hear public argument, confer privately, share their views and review drafts
confidentially, and then issue their public decision.

What you have suggested in terms of releasing the preliminary discussion draft of the
Order runs contrary to Commission procedure followed over the years by both Democratic and
Republican Chairs. If decades of precedent are to be changed, then there must be an opportunity
for thoughtful review in the lead up to any change.

I intend to ask the Commission to adopt an Open Internet Order at our next open meeting,
on February 26, 2015. As is long-standing and established FCC procedure, I will circulate a
draft Order for consideration by my fellow commissioners three weeks prior to the date of that
meeting (on February 5, 2015). We will continue to hear from interested parties in the run-up to
the open meeting, will engage in the normal confidential process of sharing and considering
changes to that Order and, of course, will consider and discuss the matter in public at the open
meeting.

The Commission's Open Internet proceeding has been one of the most transparent and
inclusive proceedings in recent memory. Indeed, we have received more than four million
comments - a record for any Commission proceeding - on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
released last spring. We have been urged to act, and act swiftly, to protect Internet openness. We
have also had continuous engagement with stakeholders, including in the form of six separate
roundtables. These roundtables, which were open to the public, addressed Open Internet issues,
including mobile broadband, effective enforcement, and technological considerations, and also
sought the best economic and legal thinking on Open Internet topics. The information gathered
from these roundtables, public comments, and other engagement with stakeholders has informed
our deliberations in the Open Internet proceeding. The almost 600 Ex Parte filings in this
proceeding are another indication of the extensive dialogue the Commission and stakeholders
have conducted in recent months.

Our decisionmaking process has also been informed by regular and detailed, bipartisan
engagement with Congress, including you and other Members and staff of your Committees.
Again, I am pleased that we share the goal of ensuring a free and open Internet, and I am
committed to continuing to work with you toward that end and on other matters of interest to
your Committees,

Again, I am pleased that we share the goal of ensuring a free and open Internet, and I am
committed to continuing to work with you toward that end and on other matters of interest to
your Committees. Please do not hesitate to be in touch with me if I may be of further assistance
in this matter.