As chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, I've logged more than 5,000 miles driving across the country to see first-hand how digital technologies are unleashing opportunity in U.S. communities and to understand the connectivity challenges many Americans face.
The FCC should facilitate, rather than frustrate, innovation.
What is responsible for the phenomenal development of the Internet? Well, it certainly wasn't heavy-handed government regulation.
Our rules need to keep pace with current technology so that Americans who use hearing aids can easily use phones.
Heavy-handed regulations hurt the very consumers they're supposed to help.
Infrastructure investment is critical to closing the digital divide in our country and bringing high-speed Internet access to more rural Americans.
I believe that the FCC and Tribal Nations share the same goal-ensuring high-speed Internet access to anyone who wants it, while respecting and preserving sites with historic, religious, and cultural significance to Tribes.
There is no reason why any legitimate caller should be spoofing an unassigned or invalid number. And providers shouldn't be sued for doing the right thing by blocking illegitimate spoofing.
Entrepreneurs are constantly developing new technologies and services. But too often, they're unable to bring them quickly to market for consumers because regulatory inertia stands in the way. Unfortunately, the FCC can suffer from this government-wide problem.
Everyone believes that artificial or prerecorded calls - 'robocalls,' as they're known - are awful. They're intrusive. They're unwanted.
There is no reason why any legitimate caller should be spoofing an unassigned or invalid phone number. It's just a way for scammers to evade the law.
Unfortunately, Lifeline, known in some circles as the 'Obamaphone' program, is plagued by waste, fraud, and abuse.
For newspapers to continue to play an important role in civic engagement, they need more access to capital. Their decline has created a real threat to independent reporting at the state and local level.
We all agree on the core values of a free and open Internet. We simply may disagree on the appropriate regulatory framework for securing those values. And I would much rather have an open and honest debate about the appropriate regulatory framework as opposed to throwing misinformation out there to achieve political ends.
Bottom line: government shouldn't be a bottleneck for entrepreneurs looking to design a better mousetrap.
I oppose any proposal for the federal government to build and operate a nationwide 5G network.
Whether you live in a big city or a small town, a call placed by a loved one, friend, or customer should go through.
The United States needs modern, flexible, light-touch network regulation, not a one-size-fits-all utility model from the 1930s.
Consumers and businesses alike value their ability to keep a phone number when changing providers or relocating. This concept is called 'number portability.'
To realize the promise of 5G, we will need smart networks, not dumb pipes. Dumb pipes won't deliver smart cities. Dumb pipes won't enable millions of connected, self-driving cars to navigate the roads safely at the same time.
