The Third Way: A Narrowly Tailored Broadband Framework

David Badertscher
This posting is essentially a followup of two of our earlier postings on this topic which you can find here and here.

It begins with two statements released by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on May 6, 2010 in partial response to the recent decision in the Comcast case.and continues with a listing of recent Congressional Research Service (CRS) Reports addressing various aspects of the topic:

First Statement:
The Third Way: A Narrowly Tailored Broadband Framework. a statement by Julius Genachowski Chairman, Federal Communications Commission.

Many have asked about the FCC’s next steps in view of the recent decision in the Comcast case. On May 6, 2010 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released two statements to address this question. The first statement by Julius Genachowski, Chairman of the FCC describes a path forward, which will begin with seeking public comment on a post-Comcast legal foundation for the FCC’s approach to broadband communications services. The goal according to Mr. Genachowski, is to restore the broadly supported status quo consensus that existed prior to the court decision on the FCC’s role with respect to broadband Internet service. He emphasizes that he “is open to all ideas on the best approach to achieve our country’s vital goals with respect to high-speed broadband for all Americans, and the Commission proceeding to follow will seek comment on multiple legal theories and invite new ideas”.

Second Statement:
A Third-Way Legal Framework For Addressing The Comcast Dilemma, a statement by Austin Schlick, General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission prepared at the request of Chairman Genachowski:

The second statement, prepared by Austin Schlick, General Counsel of the FCC at the request of Chairman Genachowski describes the legal thinking behind the narrow and tailored approach to broadband communications services that Chairman Genachowski introduced for public discussion on May 6. It springs from a longstanding consensus about how the FCC should approach Internet access services; from a recent court decision that casts serious doubt on the FCC’s current strategy for implementing that consensus; and from a belief that Congress’s laws and the Supreme Court’s decisions provide a way to overcome this new challenge.

Those interested in this topic may also want to obtain copies of the following recently released CRS Reports: Due to restrictions we cannot provide them in full text on this blog.

Distribution of Broadband Stimulus Grants and Loans: Applications and Awards
Report No. R41164 Subjects: Rural Affairs; Telecommunications CRS Reports, 111th Congress (4/16/2010; Posted: 4/23/2010)

Broadband Internet Access and the Digital Divide: Federal Assistance Programs
Report No. RL30719 Subjects: Telecommunications CRS Reports, 111th Congress (4/19/2010; Posted: 5/4/2010)

Broadband Loan and Grant Programs in the USDA’s Rural Utilities Service
Report No. RL33816 Subjects: Rural Affairs; Telecommunications CRS Reports, 111th Congress (4/20/2010; Posted: 5/5/2010)

The FCC’s Authority to Regulate Net Neutrality after Comcast v. FCC
Report No. R40234 Subjects: Telecommunications CRS Reports, 111th Congress (4/23/2010; Posted: 5/6/2010)

Broadband Infrastructure Programs in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
Report No. R40436 Subjects: Economic Policy; Telecommunications CRS Reports, 111th Congress (5/6/2010; Posted: 5/17/2010)

Access to Broadband Networks: The Net Neutrality Debate
Report No. R40616 Subjects: Telecommunications CRS Reports, 111th Congress (5/6/2010; Posted: 5/18/2010)