Federal Communications Commission (FCC)

The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday unanimously advanced its version of a FY 2024 federal spending bill that proposes increased annual funding for the FCC and FTC. The House Appropriations Committee voted 34-26 that afternoon to advance the Financial Services Subcommittee's FY24 spending bill, which would decrease funding for both agencies. The House Appropriations Commerce, Justice and Science and Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies subcommittees plan to mark up their FY24 spending bills Friday with proposals to decrease funding to NTIA and other tech-related Commerce Department agencies and end CPB’s traditional “two-year advance funding status” altogether.

Senate Democratic officials and other observers now believe it's a matter of when, not if, the chamber will confirm FCC nominee Anna Gomez and renominated Commissioners Brendan Carr and Geoffrey Starks after the Commerce Committee advanced them Wednesday, all on non-unanimous voice votes, as expected (see 2307110071). Backers of Gomez and Starks and other observers cited unified committee Democratic support for Gomez and Starks as a sign they may get unanimous caucus backing on the floor. At least one of the four Commerce Republicans who didn't oppose the Democratic nominees Wednesday plans to vote for them on the floor.

The Senate Commerce Committee plans to vote Wednesday on three FCC nominees and commission inspector general candidate Fara Damelin, as expected (see 2306270067), the committee said Thursday. Incumbent Democratic Commissioner Geoffrey Starks and new pick Anna Gomez got copious questions from Senate Commerce ranking member Ted Cruz of Texas and other panel Republicans, but none of them indicated the same level of negativity that ex-nominee Gigi Sohn faced during her often-fractious year-plus confirmation process. Committee Democrats, meanwhile, probed Republican Commissioner Brendan Carr on controversial statements he made since becoming a commissioner during the Trump administration.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision last week in the student loan case, Biden v. Nebraska, didn’t touch on communications law, but it delves deeper into the "major questions doctrine" laid out a year ago in West Virginia v. EPA (see 2206300066). Legal experts told us the opinion, by Chief Justice John Roberts, appears to further expand when the doctrine may apply and moves the court further away from the Chevron doctrine. The case also has implications for the most controversial items addressed by the FCC, including net neutrality, experts said.

State commissioners proposed NARUC telecom resolutions seeking permanent annual funding for the affordable connectivity program (ACP) and recommending no government subsidies to communications companies using network equipment that might pose a national security risk. The state regulator association may consider the draft resolutions at its July 16-19 meeting in Austin. Telecom Committee ex-Chair Karen Charles Peterson of Massachusetts proposed the ACP resolution and another draft that would urge expanding Lifeline Awareness Week to include broadband access. ACP funds are expected to dry up by Q2 2024, said the first resolution. “Establishing a new federal assistance program was a complex process at the federal, state, territory, tribal and local level,” and potentially losing a permanent low-income broadband program "with government oversight is troubling because universal high speed internet access is essential for a well-functioning economy.” New Telecom Committee Chair Tim Schram (R) of Nebraska proposed the national security resolution. Despite "efforts to rip out and replace equipment and services from" the FCC's covered list "to safeguard our communications networks," a March 1 FCC public notice found about 79 providers still have covered equipment. That poses "an unacceptable risk to national security,” the draft said. The resolution would encourage the FCC to work with state commissions and broadband offices to identify risky equipment and hold back funding. “NARUC recommends that no federal, state, or local governmental body provide universal service support, broadband deployment support, or any other form of grant funding to any communications company which utilizes equipment identified on the FCC’s Covered List anywhere in its network.”

California commissioners should "move forward with steps to regulate VoIP providers and provide specific recommendations for an appropriate regulatory framework,” said Center for Accessible Technology (CforAT), The Utility Reform Network (TURN) and Communications Workers of America (CWA). The California Public Utilities Commission received reply comments Friday in docket R.22-08-008. "Industry parties continue to fixate on preemption," as they have for the past nine months of the proceeding, the consumer and workers' groups complained. That CforAT, TURN and CWA "ignore the preemption issue entirely" means industry's "preemption arguments stand unrebutted," replied AT&T. The California Broadband and Video Association warned the CPUC that market "entry requirements and other utility-style regulations for interconnected VoIP service are not only unnecessary but would exceed the Commission’s authority and conflict with [FCC] and federal court precedent.” Regulating business VoIP providers "is unnecessary and unsupported by the evidentiary record or actual marketplace experiences,” the Cloud Communications Alliance replied. But Small Business Utility Advocates said the CPUC has legal authority and should regulate VoIP.

An upcoming Supreme Court decision in Biden v. Nebraska, which concerns the White House’s student loan forgiveness program, could clarify to what degree the court’s major questions doctrine (see 2302080064) could be used to challenge the actions of federal agencies such as the FCC, said HWG's Chris Wright and FCC Deputy General Counsel Jacob Lewis Thursday on a virtual FCBA panel.

Senate Commerce Committee Republicans are likely to barrage FCC nominee Anna Gomez with questions during a Thursday confirmation hearing to pinpoint her positions on communications policies the commission might act on under a 3-2 Democratic majority, but won’t go as negative as during ex-candidate Gigi Sohn’s February panel (see 2302140077), lawmakers and lobbyists said in interviews. Gomez will get a far friendlier reception from Senate Commerce’s Democratic majority, but officials say they will be eyeing questions from three caucus members who were undecided on Sohn in the weeks before her March withdrawal (see 2303070082).

The FCC’s administration of its affordable connectivity program and other broadband initiatives won’t be the sole focus of a Wednesday House Communications Subcommittee hearing with commission Chair Jessica Rosenworcel and other commissioners, but it’s likely to be the item with the most bearing on future policymaking, observers said in interviews. The panel is happening a day before two of the commissioners -- Republican Brendan Carr and Democrat Geoffrey Starks -- appear before the Senate Commerce Committee for a joint confirmation hearing with new FCC nominee Anna Gomez (see 2306150068). The House Communications hearing will begin at 10:30 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn.

The reaction has been muted to FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel's speech Wednesday launching a Privacy and Data Protection Task Force and urging a more aggressive approach by the agency on data privacy (see 2306140075). But some observers questioned how far the FCC can go under its legal authority to regulate privacy. Rosenworcel said Wednesday sections 222 and 631 of the Communication Act provide the grounding for FCC action. Congress rejected ISP privacy rules approved under former Chairman Tom Wheeler, through a Congressional Review Act resolution (see 1704040059).