SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai leaves a meeting Dec. 14, 2017 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
'Shallow at Best and Ridiculous at Worst': Analysis Eviscerates FCC Chair's Arguments for Killing Net Neutrality
Researchers say Ajit Pai's claim that the rules hindered broadband deployment is total "bogus."
Jun 13, 2018
A new analysis by the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) found that Trump-appointed FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's reasoning behind forcing a deeply unpopular repeal of federal net neutrality rules "to be shallow at best and ridiculous at worst."
In December of 2017, the FCC voted along party-lines to roll back Title II rules that barred internet service providers (ISPs) from prioritizing certain online content. While digital rights advocates continue to fight the decision, Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan has so far declined to schedule a vote on a Senate-approved Congressional Reveiew Act (CRA) resolution to overturn the regulators' ruling, so the repeal officially took effect Monday.
Pai justified the move with claims that the regulations caused a decline in broadband deployment, based upon "several outside reports that suggested carriers curtailed spending on upgrading and expanding their broadband networks when they feared regulations would erode financial returns." In other words, he believed that rules which aimed to protect consumers resulted in fewer people having internet access. That justfication, as CPI outlined in a report co-published by Salon, "is bogus."
Based on a review of Census and FCC data, CPI found that "while wireline deployment did slow while network neutrality rules were in place, it was due to at least one reason that had nothing to do with regulation: carriers were running out of potential customers." In spite of this, "Pai made no mention of the possibility that customer bases were reaching maximum capacity when he cast net neutrality as the bogeyman in May congressional testimony and during a March American Cable Association annual summit."
Additionally, in terms of increases and decreases in broadband deployment, "there's got to be more than one causal factor," said Free Press research director S. Derek Turner. "Sure, regulation could be one of those things, but there's a lot of other things that probably are more realistic or logical to talk about."
One such factor is the FCC Connect America Fund, which offers grants to support broadband efforts in rural communities. As the report pointed out:
Ahead of the rules, between mid-2012 and the end of 2014, the FCC distributed nearly $5 billion in grants to rural ISPs for broadband deployment. When the net neutrality order took effect, the FCC was deliberating future Connect America funding and only disbursed $1.12 billion, nearly 50 percent less than the amount spent the year prior.
Turner posed that "this ramp up and subsequent sharp drop in rural broadband funding created a major, and far more likely impactful factor on rural broadband availability than any regulatory policy change."
FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, a Democrat who voted against the repeal--and announced in April that she is stepping down from the agency, told CPI that her own research also refuted Pai's claims. "I would agree," she said, "there is no proof that the 2015 net neutrality rules caused any reduction in broadband investment."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A new analysis by the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) found that Trump-appointed FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's reasoning behind forcing a deeply unpopular repeal of federal net neutrality rules "to be shallow at best and ridiculous at worst."
In December of 2017, the FCC voted along party-lines to roll back Title II rules that barred internet service providers (ISPs) from prioritizing certain online content. While digital rights advocates continue to fight the decision, Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan has so far declined to schedule a vote on a Senate-approved Congressional Reveiew Act (CRA) resolution to overturn the regulators' ruling, so the repeal officially took effect Monday.
Pai justified the move with claims that the regulations caused a decline in broadband deployment, based upon "several outside reports that suggested carriers curtailed spending on upgrading and expanding their broadband networks when they feared regulations would erode financial returns." In other words, he believed that rules which aimed to protect consumers resulted in fewer people having internet access. That justfication, as CPI outlined in a report co-published by Salon, "is bogus."
Based on a review of Census and FCC data, CPI found that "while wireline deployment did slow while network neutrality rules were in place, it was due to at least one reason that had nothing to do with regulation: carriers were running out of potential customers." In spite of this, "Pai made no mention of the possibility that customer bases were reaching maximum capacity when he cast net neutrality as the bogeyman in May congressional testimony and during a March American Cable Association annual summit."
Additionally, in terms of increases and decreases in broadband deployment, "there's got to be more than one causal factor," said Free Press research director S. Derek Turner. "Sure, regulation could be one of those things, but there's a lot of other things that probably are more realistic or logical to talk about."
One such factor is the FCC Connect America Fund, which offers grants to support broadband efforts in rural communities. As the report pointed out:
Ahead of the rules, between mid-2012 and the end of 2014, the FCC distributed nearly $5 billion in grants to rural ISPs for broadband deployment. When the net neutrality order took effect, the FCC was deliberating future Connect America funding and only disbursed $1.12 billion, nearly 50 percent less than the amount spent the year prior.
Turner posed that "this ramp up and subsequent sharp drop in rural broadband funding created a major, and far more likely impactful factor on rural broadband availability than any regulatory policy change."
FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, a Democrat who voted against the repeal--and announced in April that she is stepping down from the agency, told CPI that her own research also refuted Pai's claims. "I would agree," she said, "there is no proof that the 2015 net neutrality rules caused any reduction in broadband investment."
A new analysis by the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) found that Trump-appointed FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's reasoning behind forcing a deeply unpopular repeal of federal net neutrality rules "to be shallow at best and ridiculous at worst."
In December of 2017, the FCC voted along party-lines to roll back Title II rules that barred internet service providers (ISPs) from prioritizing certain online content. While digital rights advocates continue to fight the decision, Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan has so far declined to schedule a vote on a Senate-approved Congressional Reveiew Act (CRA) resolution to overturn the regulators' ruling, so the repeal officially took effect Monday.
Pai justified the move with claims that the regulations caused a decline in broadband deployment, based upon "several outside reports that suggested carriers curtailed spending on upgrading and expanding their broadband networks when they feared regulations would erode financial returns." In other words, he believed that rules which aimed to protect consumers resulted in fewer people having internet access. That justfication, as CPI outlined in a report co-published by Salon, "is bogus."
Based on a review of Census and FCC data, CPI found that "while wireline deployment did slow while network neutrality rules were in place, it was due to at least one reason that had nothing to do with regulation: carriers were running out of potential customers." In spite of this, "Pai made no mention of the possibility that customer bases were reaching maximum capacity when he cast net neutrality as the bogeyman in May congressional testimony and during a March American Cable Association annual summit."
Additionally, in terms of increases and decreases in broadband deployment, "there's got to be more than one causal factor," said Free Press research director S. Derek Turner. "Sure, regulation could be one of those things, but there's a lot of other things that probably are more realistic or logical to talk about."
One such factor is the FCC Connect America Fund, which offers grants to support broadband efforts in rural communities. As the report pointed out:
Ahead of the rules, between mid-2012 and the end of 2014, the FCC distributed nearly $5 billion in grants to rural ISPs for broadband deployment. When the net neutrality order took effect, the FCC was deliberating future Connect America funding and only disbursed $1.12 billion, nearly 50 percent less than the amount spent the year prior.
Turner posed that "this ramp up and subsequent sharp drop in rural broadband funding created a major, and far more likely impactful factor on rural broadband availability than any regulatory policy change."
FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, a Democrat who voted against the repeal--and announced in April that she is stepping down from the agency, told CPI that her own research also refuted Pai's claims. "I would agree," she said, "there is no proof that the 2015 net neutrality rules caused any reduction in broadband investment."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.