| 来源类型 | Article
|
| 规范类型 | 评论
|
| Revising Principles |
| Harold Furchtgott-Roth
|
| 发表日期 | 2002-09-23
|
| 出版年 | 2002
|
| 语种 | 英语
|
| 摘要 | Uncertainty about the legal status of FCC regulations has been a major factor in the collapse of the telecommunications sectors. Businesses cannot plan where the law is shrouded in mystery, but each time the FCC loses in court and refuses promptly to correct its mistakes, the mystery deepens. While different companies disagree on exactly which FCC regulations are wrong, they all agree that the FCC’s litigation strategy has harmed them with unnecessary and unending regulatory uncertainty.
The typical FCC reaction to a loss in one court is months of denial followed by years of appeal. Rarely if ever does the FCC, after receiving an adverse opinion, offer the court the following: an apology to the wronged parties an offer to the court to correct all deficiencies within 90 days. To most Americans, justice delayed is justice denied. To a telecommunications company of any stripe, justice and regulation are complete strangers.
The disdain with which the FCC has historically held courts has been all too requited in recent years when the agency seems to have lost a majority of its major court battles. A baseball all-star may only hope to have a batting average of .400 combined with a belligerent attitude towards umpires, but these attributes are not the worthy aspirations of a federal regulatory agency.
Two current cases illustrate the unending FCC litigation strategy. Earlier this month, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a request from the FCC and others for a review of its decision in US Telecom Assn v. FCC. A series of successful court challenges has meant that the unbundled network element rules have never been beyond the shadow of a legal doubt since the first rules were written under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 more than six years ago. No one knows exactly what the law is today much less next year or at the end of any reasonable business plan horizon.
Early next month, the FCC will have oral arguments before the Supreme Court in FCC v. NextWave, a case that has spent four years in and out of countless court rooms with a constantly changing array of FCC legal positions. One can almost hear a collective groan of disbelief as the Justices review that case. Of course, no one will hear anything over the fallow NextWave spectrum as long as the FCC pursues its taxpayer-subsidized vendetta against NextWave. And the Supreme Court will likely be blissfully unaware of the FCC’s efforts to extricate from the unlawful and ill-advised reauction of the NextWave licenses with recent public posturing.
It is not too late for the FCC under Chairman Powell to correct the mistakes of an inherited litigation legacy. Below are three principles the current FCC might consider.
An agency committed to these principles would likely win the confidence of judges, businesses, investors, and the American public.
Harold Furchtgott-Roth is a visiting fellow at AEI. |
| 主题 | Economics
|
| 标签 | Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
; Furchtgott-Roth
; Telecommunications
|
| URL | https://www.aei.org/articles/revising-principles/
|
| 来源智库 | American Enterprise Institute (United States)
|
| 资源类型 | 智库出版物
|
| 条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/238054
|
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714 |
Harold Furchtgott-Roth. Revising Principles. 2002.
|
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。
