Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Abolish the FCC? You're crazy

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:48:11 -0400

Abolish the FCC? You're crazy

By Declan McCullagh
http://news.com.com/2010-1037-5233195.html

Story last modified June 14, 2004, 11:00 AM PDT

When it comes to the Federal Communications Commission,
telecommunications regulator and bane of Howard Stern, everyone seems to
have a remarkably strong opinion.

After I suggested eliminating the FCC in a recent column, my poor in-box
was stuffed with scores of polarized responses. They were evenly divided
between CNET News.com readers convinced that abolishing one of
Washington's more optional agencies is long overdue--and others
convinced that I'm a blithering idiot.

"The FCC, notwithstanding Janet Jackson silliness and other poor
decisions, is definitely necessary," Hank Williams wrote. "If mistakes
were a (criterion) for government institution elimination, then the Iraq
war would be justification for the elimination of the presidency. And
just to be clear, that's a silly idea, too."

Phil Koenig accused me of pandering to big business: "I've never liked
the idea--just hatched during the Clinton years--of auctioning off the
airwaves.

People tend to be better stewards of what they own than of public
property they don't.

Abolish the FCC? Talk about regressive. That would be one of the biggest
giveaways to elite corporate interests of a public resource that I can
think of. You may as well suggest selling off to the highest bidder the
National Park System, federal wildlife preserves and the White House."

Last week's column recounted examples of the FCC's mistakes that have
cost Americans tens of billions of dollars, concluding that the
commission is so technologically backward that it is doing more harm
than good. Airwaves could be privatized, and rights to spectrum could be
enforced by courts, with antitrust law ensuring that no single company
would become a monopolist of the airwaves.

"Just selling off the public spectrum to large, international
corporations with the highest bids to do with as they please is
downright frightening! How much more junk and advertising that serves no
public good do we need forced down our throats?" asked Paul Tincknell,
who apparently doesn't like to change the channel. "With no avenue for
recourse, how do we stop the crap from flowing into every open
communications port in our lives? And when the free-market choice is
more of the same but from a different company, what kind of competition
is that?"

Raife Edwards, writing in the comment section at the end of last week's
column, wanted to reform the FCC instead of eliminating it. "In short, I
agree that 'public resources' should be regulated by government for the
benefit of society--the least amount of control that is workable, as our
founding fathers intended--however, the FCC's actions are simply
inexcusable."

Homesteading rights

One source of dismay was the amateur-radio community, which worried that
the slice of spectrum they rely on would be replaced with commercial
stations blaring Top 40 hits.

Gordon Lundy wrote: "I am an ardent amateur-radio enthusiast, and if the
FCC were completely removed from the scene in terms of radio frequency,
regulation there would be, based upon the incredible commercial
precedents of previous legal challenges by cellular phone and
telecommunications companies, a near total loss of any 'open' and
protected radio bandwidths used by amateur and emergency radio services.
Those frequencies would be withdrawn from the public and then become
'private' bandwidths."

Ed Cummings was concerned about not just amateur radio but also other
noncommercial users. "How would your free-market approach to radio
spectrum management accommodate noncommercial users of the spectrum?
These would include individuals using GMRS, FRS and CB frequencies, as
well as over 700,000 U.S. radio amateurs whose well-rehearsed use of
large chunks of their spectrum for effective disaster relief is well
documented.

Not everyone thought I should be thwacked upside the head with a
satellite dish.

There are millions of amateur 'ham' radio operators worldwide. Many
users of the radio spectrum do not use it for a profit, nor can they
afford to bid against corporations."

These are reasonable objections. Fortunately, the answer is simple:
Amateur radio operators would be granted homesteading rights to the
spectrum they currently use. Title could be awarded to the American
Radio Relay League, the national association of ham radio buffs, which
likely would police use of it more carefully than the FCC currently
does. People tend to be better stewards of what they own than of public
property they don't.

Other existing broadcasters and cellular providers would be granted
rights to the spectrum they use. No other solution is reasonable or
feasible, especially when companies like AT&T have written checks in the
tens of billions for spectrum licenses. Privatizing the airwaves would
let their owners buy and sell slices of idle spectrum that could be put
to more productive uses quickly. Compare that to the current process of
hiring $500-an-hour lawyers to beg the FCC for political boons that may
never be granted.

Another defense of the FCC came from fans of software-defined radio,
which can jump around vast chunks of the radio spectrum, including PCS,
cellular and other wireless frequencies. Because those radios are so
flexible, the argument goes, spectrum should be treated as a kind of
public commons. Perhaps. But it's hardly clear that the FCC can make
better decisions than the actual users and developers of the technology.
Meanwhile, the FCC may throttle software-defined radio in the "broadcast
flag" regulations, not help the concept along.

"Ignorant politicians and bureaucrats"

Not everyone thought I should be thwacked upside the head with a
satellite dish. "Loved your article on doing in the FCC--it is a
decrepit, lawless institution that is simply a playground for rent
seekers," said Raymond Gifford, invoking the economic term for
corporations lobbying for economic advantage over their rivals. Gifford
should know: He used to be the chairman of Colorado's Public Utilities
Commission.

Americans offended by the spectacle of the FCC's moralists assailing
Janet Jackson and Howard Stern also liked the idea of deleting the FCC
and privatizing the airwaves. They recognized the truth: When airwaves
are nationalized, government is a censor. The First Amendment makes it
much more difficult for that to happen on private property.

Alan Wallace said the Jackson and Stern flaps "can only happen when
ignorant politicians and bureaucrats look to grandstand for bigger pay
and job security by saying they made sure they protected us. As a father
of three, I'm more capable than my politicians, and it should be my job
to begin with. Retire the FCC, and promote proper parenting."

"Excellent article on why the FCC should be abolished," Michael Fusaro
said. "Here's to hoping more people like yourself in the media will
spend more time bringing to light how the FCC is killing the First
Amendment."

Marty Mankins was especially appreciative. "Just wanted to say kudos to
you for your wonderful and truthful article on getting rid of the FCC,"
he said. "What was originally a government organization for managing
broadcast spectrum is now the moral majority, wielding power that it has
no place in (having). Your options are a perfect replacement for what
needs to happen. Thank you again for your efforts as a journalist to say
what needed to be said."

Marty, you're quite welcome. If anyone else wants to weigh in on whether
the FCC deserves a death sentence, feel free to join the discussion in
the comment section below.

Copyright ©1995-2004 CNET Networks, Inc.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/61FxlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

-- 
    "NEXTEL-1 IT'S NOT JUST NEXTEL"
  Note The New address 
Subscribe to Nextel-1: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL-1

  "NEXTEL2 FOR iDEN SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS"
Subscribe to Nextel2: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL2

  "WIRELESS FORUM HOMELAND SECURITY GROUP"
     The Complete Resource for Wireless Homeland Security.
Subscribe to WFHSG:  http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/WFHSG

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEXTEL-1/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     [email-masked]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/