Feature: Telecommunications Today: A View from the Commish
After serving 21 years as FCC commissioner, the author analyzes some of the main forces that are shaping today's telecommunications industry.
After over two decades on the Federal Communications Commission, I feel somewhat like the regulatory equivalent of Cal Ripken, Jr. Cal, of course, is the Baltimore Oriole who broke Lou Gehrig's record for most consecutive games played. In fact, my current FCC motto is, 'I haven't missed a meeting or an award in over 22 years as an FCC Commissioner.' Like Cal, I find that when you play the game a long time, you tend to accumulate awards.
As you know, I attribute my bumper crop of distinguished pre-posthumous awards to the venerability accorded advanced age. My standard award quote is, 'With venerability you get credit for virtues you never possessed - - and I'm grateful.' I'm gratified, too, that performing my duties in accordance with my reappointment slogan of 'Delusions of Adequacy and 75 percent of My Marbles -- A Good Norm in Washington!' has found such charitable widespread acceptance in the form of a variety of awards. But among them all, the MSU awards I have received, the honorary Doctor of Humanities degree and two outstanding alumni awards, the most recent from the MSU Alumni club of Washington, DC this fall, are of special significance to me.
It is customary at award time to graciously credit everyone who played a role in your achievements from office boy to chief executives to distant relatives. There is one all-important not distant relative who merits some kind of special recognition in this article. It is my fellow Spartan, best-loved friend and wife, Mary (Butler), Class of '36. Last September 14th, we observed, maybe even celebrated our 59th wedding anniversary. We were married way back in the days when you said 'I do' rather than 'I did.' The fact that I lasted 59 years is a rousing testimonial to her sense of humor. Speaking of Mary, I really have been lucky. In all those years, she never filed a petition to deny my license renewal. She admits she entertained murder several times but never divorce, because divorce was specifically prohibited by her Irish Catholic upbringing. She has been a major contributor to my maintaining a becoming sense of self-unimportance. So I really believe in marriage. If it weren't for marriage, many men would go through life thinking they had no faults at all. Actually, we don't disagree very often, because Mary is very good at letting me have her way.
In a little more serious vein, any recognition or award from my cherished alma mater is especially appreciated for many reasons. First (and it better be foremost!) Mary accepted my SAE fraternity pin at Michigan state. We have many pleasant memories of our college days together. Second, it is gratifying to be recognized as an Outstanding Alumni awardee instead of an average student who spent more time working on the college newspaper and radio station than in the classroom. Third, both Mary and I are beneficiaries of such remarkable MSU growth and progress over the past 60 years that we are now graduates of a prestigious university rather than a small college, of a Big Ten school rather than an underdog independent. We are especially proud of MSU's continued growth and progress under the superb leadership of President M. Peter McPherson. So I was especially pleased with this latest meaningful MSU award, and I'd like to think that our former great MSU President, Dr. John Hannah, up there somewhere, is pleased too. And that's enough for personal biographical data, as fascinating as it may be -- to me.
It is time to give readers an insight into the functioning and current deliberations of the FCC. Our principal regulatory charge at the FCC is to assure that communications companies serve the overall 'public interest,' a term that is most frequently applied to broadcasting but also to other communications entities like telephones, satellites, and cable television systems. One of the most basic questions is, 'How do you define the `public interest'?' First, the Congress enacted the Communications Act in 1934 and required licenses to operate their broadcast stations in the public interest. The phrase was deliberately vague so that the congress and FCC could flexibly interpret and apply it to the many facets of broadcast regulation as they developed.
Over the years, I have asked legal experts at the FCC for definitions of the 'public interest,' and these have varied according to individual philosophy and theory. Actually, I believe the late Walter Lippman defined it best in practical terms (albeit with no legal authentication). He said, 'The `public interest' is what men would do if they thought clearly, decided rationally, and acted disinterestedly.' This definition provides both a goal worth striving for and an objective which nobody is wise enough to attain. In the final analysis, the term 'public interest' serves as a general overall guide. It is subject to varied interpretations and for that reason it's a source of perennial uncertainty to the regulated industries. I once defined it, in perhaps over simplistic terms, as it applied to the telephone and cable industry: 'The best service to the most people at the most reasonable cost.' Of course the key word is 'reasonable.'
Other questions invariably include: 'What is the biggest problem for an FCC Commissioner? And what is the regulatory power of the FCC?' The regulatory power of the FCC has been overestimated, challenged, debated and damned. The function and jurisdiction of the FCC as an independent regulatory agency has been defined and guided by the Constitution and by our governing statute, the Communications Act of 1934. Under the Communications Act, the FCC was established as an 'arm of Congress.' Simply put, that means that Congress has given the FCC broad statutory guidelines, like the 'public interest' standard, to guide our action, but effectively relies on the expertise of the five FCC Commissioners to fill in the blanks; that is, to write the detailed rules that will form the regulatory framework that applies to the telecommunications industry.
This obviously gives the FCC power that far exceeds its relatively diminutive size. (Can you believe that an agency numbering fewer than 2,500 people is responsible for regulating the telephone, television, radio, satellite and wireless industries that account for almost 10 percent of the Gross National Product?) For this reason, William F. Buckley, Jr. once stated that the FCC Chairman and Commissioners wield greater economic power than all the courts pub together. Although that somewhat overstates FCC power -- after all, appellate courts do review our decisions -- the impact and ramifications of some of our decisions are awesome. As the ultimate counterbalance, the Senate and the House exercise what is called 'oversight' authority and thereby make certain that all regulatory agencies maintain a becoming humility.
The numerous inquiries from oversight and special study of investigatory committees are a regulatory fact of life. The questioning is ethical, intense and detailed. In fact, I've humorously said that it would be only a matter of time before commissioners would be called upon to respond to the following question in an oversight inquiry: 'Is there anything known only to you that could possibly be used to embarrass, discredit, or impeach you? Please state, and remember you are under oath.'
My good friend, Chairman John Dingell, the distinguished Democrat communications leader in the House, gave me fair advance warning. When I was first nominated to be an FCC Commissioner, he said, 'What do you want the damn job for? You will be beat up by Congress and overruled in the court.'