Feb 26, 2008, News Report
Representative Edward J. Markey, chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, delivered the following prepared remarks at the Federal Communications Commission hearing on Internet freedom in Cambridge, MA this morning:
"Good Morning. I'd like to welcome the members of the Federal Communications Commission to Massachusetts. I also want to again thank the Chairman and the Commissioners for adjusting the schedule so as to accommodate my ability to be here with you this morning.
"Just over 20 years ago, in October of 1987, I chaired a field hearing of the then-Telecommunications and Finance Subcommittee here in Massachusetts. FCC Chairman Dennis Patrick was the lead witness and the issue was his proposal to levy per-minute access charges on computer users. His argument at the time was that because emerging online services like CompuServe and Prodigy accessed the network in the same way AT&T and MCI did, computer users should foot the bill the same way long distance phone users did. He testified that if such fees were assessed then it might help lower long distance rates by.....a whopping one percent.
"I battled against this short-sighted proposal. I contended that higher, per minute charges would dramatically reduce the use of electronic information services, crippling an infant industry. I stipulated that for education and health care and innovation, we needed to treat this nascent information industry as special and nurture it. And even though AT&T and the other carriers were powerful foes compared to the embryonic information industry, my view prevailed at the Commission.
"As a result, when Congress voted a few years later to permit the commercialization of the Internet, providers were able to offer consumers flat-rate pricing for accessing the Internet, and consumer use and innovation flourished. No wonder that former FCC Chairman Bill Kennard has said that this decision was the single most important decision in fostering the growth of the Internet.
"I am pleased therefore that the Commission has returned to Massachusetts to examine contemporary issues in the development of the Internet. As you analyze the issues before you today, I want to briefly suggest a few thoughts to keep in mind.
"First, let me underscore that the Internet is as much mine and yours as it is Verizon's, AT&T's or Comcast's. Please keep front and center in your examination the needs and wishes of the community of users rather than a small coterie of carriers.
"Much like the policy debate over access charges on information services at the FCC two decades ago -- the key question for safeguarding the Internet is recognition that the nature of the Net is really not about services provided by carriers themselves. They don't provide 'Internet services' -- they provide broadband access to the Internet. There's a difference between the two and this distinction is vital in my view in order to ascertain the proper role for the FCC and for the carriers themselves going forward.
"If we emphasize unduly the present desires by broadband network providers to utilize certain network management tools, it runs the risk of conceding all-too-readily that these network providers have a genuine role in managing -- and in so doing, constraining -- our broadband access to the Internet. I understand that there may be transitional issues until bandwidth increases sufficiently, but the Commission should be wary about the premise posed by any carrier's contention of the need for a significant network management position.
"Perhaps if we had multiple competitors or super-high bandwidth to residential consumers this wouldn't be an issue. The problem today is that we have neither sufficient competition nor affordable, truly high-speed access to the Internet. I fully support and celebrate efforts by industry participants to deliver ever higher bandwidth speeds to consumers and have battled in Washington to ensure
Read real world deployments of technology in government from our sponsors.
View All Industry SolutionsThis section
brought to you by:
Emergency Management magazine invites you to participate in our Communications and Interoperable Technology Survey. Our 11 questions are very brief and should only take 5 minutes of your time.
Complete our survey now, and enter to win a $25 Amazon Gift Card!
Webinar: A New Era in Public Safety Wednesday, December 10, 2008 from 11:00 am - 12:00 pm PST/2:00 pm - 3:00 pm EST
A New Era in Public Safety BlackBerry® smartphones running on Sprint networks deliver a wide range of applications that are transforming public safety operations.
Hurricane Preparedness Tips When a hurricane hits, are you prepared to keep in touch?
Case Study - Morris County, New Jersey The Morris County Communications Center upgraded to a new trunked radio system with the benefits of a cellular network, extending coverage beyond county lines
Case Study - Iredell County, North Carolina Spanning over 570 sq miles, it became imperative that the Iredell County Emergency Communications, Operations and Management extend it's communications systems to enhance reliability, security, and coverage.
Case Study - City of Anaheim, California The City of Anaheim saw an opportunity to leverage existing GST and partner with nearby cities to enhance safety operations through data interoperability.
Case Study - Charlottesville, Virginia Fire Department Taking advantage of a range of interoperability solution, the Charlottesville Fire Department has achieved a network that can serve as backup to their existing public safety network.
Sprint ERT Go-Kit with GST Optima Rapid, interoperable communications for emergencies, drills and field exercises.
Optimal Interoperability Until recently it was not possible to cost effectively connect commercial networks to LMR systems. Improvements in communications technology have resulted in greatly enhanced operational capability and have reduced the log-term cost of communications system ownership.
Multi-agency interoperability for Public Safety Establishing cross-agency, real-time situational awareness is critical to effective incident management as well as daily resource management.
DHS Grants and Assistance Programs Link to overview of available grants administered by The Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Fact Sheet: Fiscal Year 2008 Preparedness Grants Major changes in funding and focus for 2008 DHS grant programs
Remarks on 2008 Homeland Security Grant Guidance DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff and FEMA Administrator David Paulison
$1.8 billion in DHS Homeland Security Grant Program Awards
Funding Public Safety Communications Whether you are a law enforcement agency, looking for funding to support an interoperable communications solution or a school, seeking to improve communications between building administrators, grants may provide the funding you need to implement a robust, scalable communication system.