The Federal Communications Commission: Current Structure and its Role in the Changing Telecommunications Landscape

^Pr^ep^ar^{ed f}^o^r^M^e^m^b^ers^an^d^Com^mⁱ^t^t^ees^of^C^ong^r^e^ss

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent Federal agency with its five
members appointed by the President, subject to confirmation by the Senate. It was established by
the Communications Act of 1934 (1934 Act) and is charged with regulating interstate and
international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable. The mission of the
FCC is to ensure that the American people have available—at reasonable cost and without
discrimination—rapid, efficient, nation- and world-wide communication services; whether by
radio, television, wire, satellite, or cable.
Although the FCC has restructured over the past few years to better reflect the industry, it is still
required to adhere to the statutory requirements of its governing legislation, the Communications
Act of 1934. The 1934 Act requires the FCC to regulate the various industry sectors differently.
Some policymakers have been critical of the FCC and the manner in which it regulates various
sectors of the telecommunications industry—telephone, cable television, radio and television
broadcasting, and some aspects of the Internet. These policymakers, including some in Congress,
have long called for varying degrees and types of reform to the FCC. Most proposals fall into two
categories: (1) procedural changes made within the FCC or through Congressional action that
would affect the agency’s operations or (2) substantive policy changes requiring Congressional
action that would affect how the agency regulates different services and industry sectors. During ^th^th
the 110 Congress, policymakers may continue efforts begun in the 109 Congress to restructure
the FCC.

Recent FCC-Related Congressional and Other Government Action...............................................1
Hearings: 110^th Congress...........................................................................................................1
Possible Upcoming Hearings..............................................................................................1
Government Accountability Office Studies..............................................................................1
February 2008 Report (Enforcement Program Management)............................................2
September 2007 Report (Equal Access to Rulemaking Information).................................2
FCC Budget.....................................................................................................................................3
FY2009 Budget.........................................................................................................................3
FY2008 Budget.........................................................................................................................3
FY2007 Budget.........................................................................................................................3
Overview of the FCC......................................................................................................................4
FCC Structure............................................................................................................................6
FCC Strategic Plan....................................................................................................................7
Proposals for Change.......................................................................................................................8
Potential Procedural Changes....................................................................................................8
Adoption/Release of Orders................................................................................................8
Sunshine Rules....................................................................................................................8
Ti me lines s ........................................................................................................................... 9
Enforcement ........................................................................................................................ 9
Potential Substantive Changes..................................................................................................9
Additional Reading........................................................................................................................10
Table 1. FCC Appropriations, FY1999-FY2009.............................................................................4
Author Contact Information...........................................................................................................11

The 110^th Congress assigned responsibility for Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
appropriations process to the Subcommittee on Financial Services within the Committee on
Appropriations.

On February 1, 2007, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a
hearing titled, “Assessing the Communications Marketplace: A View from the FCC.” A number
of issues were discussed, including the state of broadband deployment; public interest obligations
of broadcasters; merger approvals; localism; the digital divide; airtime for political candidates;
and media violence.
On March 14 and July 24, 2007, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee
on Telecommunications and the Internet held oversight hearings with the FCC Commissioners as
witnesses; on December 13, 2007, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation also held an oversight hearing. Topics discussed at these hearings included the
often long periods of time the FCC takes to respond to petitions and consumer complaints, the
commission’s video franchising rules, the AT&T-BellSouth merger, the National Security
Agency’s surveillance program, and cable “a la carte” proposals.
On April 17, 2007, and April 9, 2008, the House Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on
Financial Services and General Government held hearings on the FCC’s FY2008 and FY2009
budget requests, respectively.
The staff of the House Energy and Commerce Committee has recommended that the committee
hold a hearing to obtain testimony regarding its investigation into a number of issues related to
the FCC and how it has been conducting its work.
The GAO has conducted two studies in the last year related to the operation of the FCC.

According to the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) analysis of FCC data, between
2003 and 2006, the number of complaints received by the FCC totaled about 454,000 and grew
from almost 86,000 in 2003 to a high of about 132,000 in 2005. The largest number of complaints
related to violations of the do-not-call list and telemarketing during prohibited hours. The FCC
processed about 95% of the complaints it received. It also opened about 46,000 investigations and
closed about 39,000; approximately 9% of these investigations were closed with an enforcement
action and about 83% were closed with no enforcement action. The GAO was unable to
determine why these investigations were closed with no enforcement action because the FCC
does not systematically collect these data. The FCC told GAO that some investigations were
closed with no enforcement action because no violation occurred or the data were insufficient.
The GAO noted that the FCC assesses the impact of its enforcement program by periodically
reviewing certain program outputs, such as the amount of time it takes to close an investigation,
but it lacks management tools to fully measure its outcomes. Specifically, FCC has not set
measurable enforcement goals, developed a well-defined enforcement strategy, or established
performance measures that are linked to the enforcement goals. The GAO stated in its report that
without key management tools, FCC may have difficulty assuring Congress and other
stakeholders that it is meeting its enforcement mission.
The GAO found that limitations in FCC’s current approach for collecting and analyzing
enforcement data constitute the principal challenge the agency faces in providing complete and
accurate information on its enforcement program. These limitations, according to the GAO, make
it difficult to analyze trends; determine program effectiveness; allocate Commission resources; or
accurately track and monitor key aspects of all complaints received, investigations conducted, and
enforcement actions taken.

In September 2007, GAO released a study, conducted in response to a Congressional request, on
the FCC’s rulemaking process. Specifically, the GAO studied four rulemakings as case studies to
determine the extent to which the FCC followed the steps for rulemakings required by law, ³
including those related to public participation.

¹^GA^{O, Re}^{port to t}^h^e^Chaⁱ^rm^aⁿ^{, S}^ubc^om^m^itte^e^{on T}^e^le^c^o^m^m^unic^a^t^{ions a}ⁿ^{d t}^h^e^Inte^rⁿ^e^t^{, C}^o^m^m^itte^e^{on E}ⁿ^e^r^g^y^a^nd
^Co^mmerce,^Ho^u^s^{e o}^f^Rep^r^esen^t^a^tⁱ^v^es,^“F^{CC Has M}^a^d^e^S^o^m^e^P^r^o^g^{ress i}ⁿ^t^h^{e M}^aⁿ^a^ge^m^eⁿ^t^o^f^It^{s E}ⁿ^f^o^rcemen^t^P^r^o^g^ram
^b^u^t^{Faces L}ⁱ^m^itatioⁿ^s^{, an}^d^A^d^dⁱ^ti^oⁿ^a^{l A}^c^tioⁿ^s^A^r^{e Need}^ed^,”^Feb^r^u^a^r^y¹⁵^,²⁰⁰⁸^{, av}^ailab^l^{e at}^h^ttp^://w^ww^.^g^ao^.g^o^v^/
^ne^w^.^item^s^/^d08¹²^5.^pdf^.
²^GA^{O, Re}^{port to t}^h^e^Chaⁱ^rm^aⁿ^{, S}^ubc^om^m^itte^e^{on T}^e^le^c^o^m^m^unic^a^t^{ions a}ⁿ^{d t}^h^e^Inte^rⁿ^e^t^{, C}^o^m^m^itte^e^{on E}ⁿ^e^r^g^y^a^nd
^Co^mmerce,^Ho^u^s^{e o}^f^Rep^r^esen^t^a^tⁱ^v^es,^“F^{CC S}^h^ou^l^d^T^a^{ke S}^t^ep^{s t}^o^Eⁿ^su^{re E}^q^u^a^l^A^{ccess t}^o^Ru^l^e^m^a^kiⁿ^g^In^f^o^rm^atⁱ^oⁿ^,^”
^Se^pte^m^be^{r 6, 20}⁰⁷^{, a}^v^a^ila^ble^oⁿ^li^ne^a^t^htt^p^://w^ww^.ga^o^.g^ov^/ne^w^.ite^m^s^/d07¹⁰^46.^pdf^.
³^T^h^{e F}^{CC gen}^e^ral^l^y^b^e^giⁿ^s^t^h^{e ru}^l^e^m^a^kiⁿ^g^p^r^o^{cess b}^y^rel^easiⁿ^{g a N}^o^tⁱ^{ce o}^f^P^r^op^o^s^ed^R^u^l^e^m^a^kiⁿ^g^,^o^r^“NP^R^M,^{” an}^d
^e^s^ta^blishing^a^d^o^c^k^e^t^{to g}^a^the^rⁱⁿ^f^o^rm^a^{tion subm}^itte^{d by}^the^p^ubl^ic^{or de}^v^e^lope^{d w}^ithin^the^FCC^{to s}^upp^ort^the
^pro^pose^d^r^u^le^{. Ou}^tside^pa^rtie^{s a}^r^e^pe^rm^itte^{d to m}^e^e^t^w^{ith FCC}^sta^f^{f, bu}^{t m}^u^{st f}^ile^a^disc^losureⁱⁿ^the^doc^k^e^{t, c}^a^lle^{d a}ⁿ
^e^x^pa^rte^f^iling^,^tha^t^inc^l^ude^{s a}ⁿ^y^ne^w^da^ta^{or a}^r^g^u^m^e^nts^pre^s^eⁿ^te^{d a}^t^the^m^e^e^ting^.^Onc^e^the^{FCC sta}^f^f^ha^{s a}ⁿ^a^l^y^z^e^d
ⁱⁿ^f^o^rm^atⁱ^oⁿⁱⁿ^t^h^{e do}^cket^an^d^d^r^a^f^t^e^d^{a f}ⁱⁿ^a^l^ru^l^e^,^t^h^{e Co}^m^mⁱ^s^sⁱ^oⁿ^e^{rs vo}^t^e^oⁿ^w^h^et^h^e^{r t}^o^ado^p^tⁱ^t^.^T^h^{e F}^{CC ch}^ai^rm^an
^de^cⁱ^de^s^w^h^ic^{h rule}^s^the^c^o^m^m^is^sⁱ^{on w}^{ill c}^o^ns^ide^r^aⁿ^{d w}^h^e^t^he^{r to a}^dop^{t t}^h^e^m^b^y^v^o^te^a^t^a^public^m^e^eting^or^by
^circu^l^atin^g^th^em^to^each^co^mm^issⁱ^oⁿ^e^{r f}^o^{r ap}^p^r^o^v^{al. Stak}^eh^o^l^d^e^{rs u}ⁿ^satisfⁱ^ed^w^ith^{a ru}^{le m}^a^y^f^{ile a p}^e^titioⁿ^f^o^r
^re^c^onside^r^a^tio^{n w}^{ith the}^c^o^m^m^issⁱ^on^or^pe^titi^{on f}^o^{r re}^vⁱ^e^w^{in f}^e^de^r^a^{l c}^ourt.

The GAO found that while the FCC generally followed the rulemaking process in the four case
studies and most ex parte filings complied with FCC rules, several stakeholders had access to
nonpublic information. For example, in discussions with some stakeholders that regularly
participate in FCC rulemakings, multiple stakeholders generally knew when the commission
scheduled votes on proposed rules well before FCC notified the public, even though FCC rules
prohibit disclosing this information outside of FCC. Other stakeholders said that they could not
learn when rules were scheduled for a vote until FCC released the public meeting agenda, at
which time FCC rules prohibit stakeholders from lobbying FCC. As a result, stakeholders with
advance information about which rules are scheduled for a vote would know when it would be
most effective to lobby FCC, while stakeholders without this information would not.
The GAO recommended that, to ensure a fair and transparent rulemaking process, the chairman
of the FCC take steps to ensure equal access to information, particularly in regard to the
disclosure of information about proposed rules that are scheduled to be considered by the
commission, by developing and maintaining (1) procedures to ensure that nonpublic information
will not be disclosed and (2) a series of actions that will occur if the information is disclosed,
such as referral to the Inspector General and providing the information to all stakeholders.

Beginning in the 110^th Congress, the FCC is funded through the Financial Services (House) and
Financial Services and General Government (Senate) appropriations process as a single line item.
Previously, it was funded through what is now the Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations
process, also as a single line item. Most of the FCC’s budget is derived from regulatory fees
collected by the agency rather than through a direct appropriation. Table 1 on the following page
lists the total appropriation, direct appropriation, and regulatory fees offset for FY1999-FY2008.
The Commission has requested a budget of $338,874,783 for FY2009. As in prior years, the
Commission proposes to receive a direct appropriation of $1,000,000 and to raise the remainder,
or $337,874,783, through regulatory fees.
The President signed a budget for the FCC of $313 million, with a direct appropriation of $1
million and the remainder to be collected through regulatory fees (P.L. 110-161, H.Rept. 110-197, ⁴
S.Rept. 110-128).
President Bush signed the fourth Continuing Resolution (CR) (P.L. 110-5) on February 15, 2007.
That CR provided funding at the FY2006 level through September 30, 2007. For FY2007, the
House recommended a budget of $294.261 million (of that figure, $293.261 million was to be

⁴^$2^1.7^m^{illion a}^b^ov^e^FY2⁰⁰⁷^aⁿ^d^the^sa^m^e^a^s^the^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^t’s^bu^dg^e^t^re^que^st.

collected through regulatory fees, with a direct appropriation of $1.0 million) (see H.Rept. 109-
520); the Senate Committee on Appropriations recommended a budget of $301.500 million, all of
which was to be collected through regulatory fees (i.e., no direct appropriation) (see S.Rept. 109-

280).

Table 1. FCC Appropriations, FY1999-FY2009
^{($ in mill}^ions)
^{Total Appr}^op^riation^{Direct Appr}^opriation^{Regulatory Fees Offset}
^{Fiscal Year}
^Requested^Enacted^Requested^Enacted^Requested^Enacted^Actual
¹⁹⁹⁹^212.^{9 192.}⁰^40.4^19.5^172.^{5 172.}⁵^172.⁵
²⁰⁰⁰^230.^{8 209.}⁹^45.1^24.1^185.^{8 185.}⁸^185.⁸
²⁰⁰¹^237.^{1 230.}⁰^37.0^29.9^200.^{1 200.}¹^200.¹
²⁰⁰²^248.^{5 245.}¹^29.8^26.3^218.^{8 218.}⁸^218.⁸
²⁰⁰³^278.^{1 271.}⁰^29.9^2.0^248.^{2 269.}⁰^265.⁷
²⁰⁰⁴^280.^{8 274.}⁰^28.8^1.0^251.^{9 273.}⁰^285.⁰
²⁰⁰⁵^293.^{0 281.}¹^20.0^1.0^273.^{0 280.}¹^292.⁹
²⁰⁰⁶^304.^{0 289.}⁸^4.8^1.0^299.^{2 288.}⁸^N/A
²⁰⁰⁷^327.^{5 291.}²^26.0^1.0^301.^{5 290.}²^N/A
²⁰⁰⁸^313.^{0 313.}⁰^1.0^1.0^312.^{0 313.}⁰^N/A
²⁰⁰^{9 338.}⁹ ^{N/A 1.0}^N/A^337.⁹^N/A^N/A

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent Federal agency with its five
members appointed by the President, subject to confirmation by the Senate. It was established by ⁵
the Communications Act of 1934 (1934 Act or “Communications Act) and is charged with
regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and ⁶
cable. The mission of the FCC is to ensure that the American people have available, “without
discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, a rapid, efficient,

⁵^T^h^e^C^o^m^m^unic^a^tions^A^c^{t of}¹⁹³^{4, 4}⁷^U^.^S.C^.^§1⁵¹^e^t^s^e^q.,^ha^s^be^eⁿ^a^m^e^nde^{d num}^e^r^ous^tim^e^s^,^m^o^s^t^sⁱ^gⁿ^if^ic^aⁿ^tl^yⁱⁿ
^recen^t^{years b}^y^t^h^{e T}^e^l^e^co^mm^uⁿⁱ^catⁱ^oⁿ^s^A^c^t^o^f¹⁹⁹⁶^,^P^.^L^.¹⁰⁴^-¹⁰^4,¹¹⁰^S^t^at^.⁵⁶⁽¹⁹⁹⁶⁾^.^Ref^e^ren^cesⁱⁿ^t^hⁱ^s^repo^rt^{are t}^o
^the¹⁹³⁴^A^c^{t, a}^s^am^e^nde^{d, u}ⁿ^le^s^s^indic^a^t^e^d^.^A^c^o^m^p^e^ndium^of^c^o^m^m^unic^a^tions^-^r^e^la^te^{d la}^w^s^is^a^v^a^ila^ble^f^r^om^the
^H^ous^e^Com^m^itte^e^{on Ene}^r^g^y^a^{nd Com}^m^e^rc^e^a^t^http://e^ne^rg^y^c^o^m^m^e^rc^e^.^hous^e^.^g^o^v^/¹⁰^8/^pubs^/¹⁰⁸^-D^.^p^df^{. It inc}^l^u^d^e^s
^s^e^le^c^t^e^d^A^c^ts^w^{ithin t}^h^e^jurⁱ^s^d^ic^ti^on^of^the^C^o^m^m^itte^e^,^inc^l^udi^ng^th^e^C^o^m^m^unic^a^tions^A^c^{t of}¹⁹³⁴^,
^T^e^lec^o^m^m^unic^a^tions^A^c^{t of}¹⁹⁹⁶^{, Com}^m^unic^a^tions^Sa^te^llite^A^c^{t of 19}^62,^N^a^tio^na^{l T}^e^le^c^o^m^m^unic^a^tions^aⁿ^d
^Iⁿ^f^o^r^m^a^{tion A}^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^{tion O}^r^g^a^niz^a^tions^A^c^{t, T}^e^le^phone^Dⁱ^s^c^l^o^s^u^r^e^a^{nd D}ⁱ^s^pute^R^e^s^o^l^u^ti^on^A^c^{t, C}^o^m^m^unic^a^tions
^A^s^si^st^an^ce^f^o^{r L}^a^w^Eⁿ^f^o^rce^m^en^t^A^c^t^,^as^w^e^l^l^{as ad}^dⁱ^tⁱ^oⁿ^a^l^co^m^m^uⁿⁱ^catⁱ^oⁿ^s^st^at^u^t^{es an}^{d sel}^ect^ed^p^r^ovi^si^oⁿ^s^f^r^o^m^t^h^e
^Uⁿ^ite^{d S}^t^a^t^e^s^C^ode^{. T}^h^e^c^o^m^p^eⁿ^dium^w^a^s^la^s^t^am^e^nde^{d on}^D^e^c^e^m^b^e^r^{31, 2}⁰⁰²^.
⁶^Se^e^A^{bout t}^h^e^FC^C^,^a^v^a^ila^ble^oⁿ^line^a^t^h^ttp:^//w^w^w^.^f^c^c^.^g^o^v^/^a^bout^u^s^.htm^l.

Nationwide, and worldwide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at ⁷
reasonable charges.”
The 1934 Act is divided into titles and sections that describe various powers and concerns of the ⁸
Commission.
• Title I—FCC Administration and Powers. The 1934 Act originally called for a
commission consisting of seven members, but that number was reduced to five in
1983. Commissioners are appointed by the President and approved by the Senate
to serve five-year terms; the President designates one member to serve as
chairman. No more than three commissioners may come from the political party
of the President. Title I empowers the Commission to create divisions or bureaus
responsible for specific work assigned and to structure itself as it chooses.
• Title II—Common carrier regulation, primarily telephone regulation, including
circuit-switched telephone services offered by cable companies. Common
carriers are communication companies that provide facilities for transmission but
do not originate messages, such as telephone and microwave providers. The 1934
Act limits FCC regulation to interstate and international common carriers,
although a joint federal-state board coordinates regulation between the FCC and
state regulatory commissions.
• Title III—Broadcast station requirements. Much existing broadcast regulation
was established prior to 1934 by the Federal Radio Commission and most
provisions of the Radio Act of 1927 were subsumed into Title III of the 1934 Act.
Sections 303-307 define many of the powers given to the FCC with respect to
broadcasting; other sections define limitations placed upon it. For example,
section 326 of Title III prevents the FCC from exercising censorship over
broadcast stations. Also, parts of the U.S. code are linked to the Communications
Act. For example, 18 U.S.C. 464 makes obscene or indecent language over a
broadcast station illegal.
• Title IV—Procedural and administrative provisions, such as hearings, joint
boards, judicial review of the FCC’s orders, petitions, and inquiries.
• Title V—Penal provisions and forfeitures, such as violations of rules and
regulations.
• Title VI—Cable communications, such as the use of cable channels and cable
ownership restrictions, franchising, and video programming services provided by
telephone companies.
• Title VII—Miscellaneous provisions and powers, such as war powers of the
President, closed captioning of public service announcements, and
telecommunications development fund.

⁷⁴⁷^U^.^S^.^C^.^§1⁵¹^.
⁸^W^h^eⁿ^Cong^re^s^s^e^s^ta^blis^he^d^the^F^{CC in}¹⁹^34,^{it m}^e^rg^e^d^re^s^pons^ibil^itie^s^pre^v^ious^ly^a^s^sⁱ^gⁿ^e^d^{to the}^Fe^de^ra^{l Ra}^dio
^Com^m^{ission, the}^In^te^rsta^te^Com^m^e^rc^e^Co^m^m^{ission, a}^{nd t}^h^e^Post^m^a^ste^r^G^e^ne^ra^{l into a}^sing^le^a^g^eⁿ^c^y^{, div}ⁱ^de^{d i}ⁿ^to^thre^e
^bur^e^a^u^s^,^B^r^oa^dc^a^s^{t, T}^e^le^g^r^a^{ph, a}ⁿ^{d T}^e^le^phone^.^Se^e^Aⁿ^a^l^y^s^is^of^the^Fe^de^r^a^{l C}^o^m^m^unic^a^tions^C^o^m^mⁱ^s^sⁱ^on,^Fr^itz
^Me^s^s^e^r^e^{, a}^v^a^ila^ble^onliⁿ^e^a^t^http^:/^/w^w^w^.osw^eg^o.e^du/^~m^es^s^e^r^e^/^F^C^C¹^.htm^{l a}^nd^the^M^u^s^e^um^of^B^r^oa^dc^a^s^t
^C^o^m^m^unic^a^tions^A^r^c^h^iv^e^a^t^http:/^/w^w^w^.^m^us^e^u^m^.^tv^/^a^r^c^hiv^e^s^/^e^t^v^/^F/htm^l^F/f^e^de^r^a^l^c^om^m^u^/^f^e^d^e^r^a^l^c^o^m^m^u.htm^f^o^r
^a^dditi^ona^{l i}ⁿ^f^o^r^m^a^{tion on}^the^his^t^or^y^of^the^FC^C^.

The FCC is directed by five Commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the
Senate for five-year terms (except when filling an unexpired term). The President designates one
of the Commissioners to serve as Chairperson. Only three Commissioners may be members of the
same political party. None of them can have a financial interest in any Commission-related
business. The current Commissioners are Kevin Martin (Chairman, term expires November
2011); Jonathan Adelstein (term expires December 2009); Michael Copps (term expires
December 2010); Deborah Taylor Tate (term expires June 2007); and Robert McDowell (term ⁹
expires June 2009).
The day-to-day functions of the FCC are carried out by seven bureaus and 10 offices. The current
basic structure of the FCC was established in 2002 as part of the agency’s effort to better reflect
the industries it regulates. The seventh bureau, the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau,
was established in 2006.
The bureaus process applications for licenses and other filings, analyze complaints, conduct
investigations, develop and implement regulatory programs, and participate in hearings, among
other things. The offices provide support services. Bureaus and offices often collaborate when ¹⁰
addressing FCC issues. The Bureaus hold the following responsibilities:
• Wireline Competition Bureau—Administers the FCC’s policies concerning
common carriers—the companies that provide long distance and local service to
consumers and businesses. These companies provide services such as voice, data,
and other telecommunication transmission services.
• Enforcement Bureau—Enforces FCC rules, orders, and authorizations.
• Wireless Telecommunications Bureau—Handles all FCC domestic wireless ¹¹
telecommunications programs and policies. Wireless communications services
include cellular, paging, personal communications services, public safety, and
other commercial and private radio services. This bureau also is responsible for
implementing the competitive bidding authority for spectrum auctions.
• Media Bureau—Develops, recommends, and administers the policy and licensing
programs relating to electronic media, including cable television, broadcast
television and radio in the United States and its territories.
• Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau—Addresses all types of consumer-
related matters from answering questions and responding to consumer complaints
to distributing consumer education materials.
• International Bureau—Administers the FCC’s international telecommunications
policies and obligations.
• Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau—Addresses issues such as public
safety communications, alert and warning of U.S. citizens, continuity of

⁹^A^dditio^na^{l inf}^o^rm^a^{tion a}^b^out^the^Com^m^is^sⁱ^one^rs^c^aⁿ^be^f^ound^a^t^h^ttp://w^w^w^.^f^cc^.g^ov^/^c^om^mⁱ^s^sⁱ^one^rs^/.
¹⁰^FC^C^Fa^c^t^S^h^e^e^t^{, a}^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^htt^p^://w^w^w^.^f^c^c^.^g^o^v^/^c^g^b/^c^ons^um^e^r^f^a^c^t^s^/^a^boutf^c^c^.^htm^l^.
¹¹^Ex^c^e^p^{t those}ⁱⁿ^v^o^lv^ing^sa^te^llite^c^o^m^m^unic^a^{tions br}^oa^dc^a^s^tin^g^,ⁱⁿ^c^l^udi^ng^lic^eⁿ^sing^{, e}ⁿ^f^o^rc^e^m^eⁿ^{t, a}^{nd re}^g^u^la^tory
^f^unc^tions^{. T}^h^e^s^e^f^unc^tio^ns^a^r^e^ha^ndle^d^by^the^Iⁿ^te^rⁿ^a^tⁱ^ona^l^B^u^r^e^a^u^.

government operations and continuity of operations planning, and disaster ¹²
management coordination and outreach.
The only FCC office that conducts regulatory proceedings is the Office of Engineering and
Technology, which advises the FCC on engineering matters. However, the Office of
Administrative Law Judges also conducts hearings and issues initial decisions. Other offices are
the Office of Communication Business Opportunities, Office of the General Counsel, Office of
the Inspector General, Office of Legislative Affairs, Office of the Managing Director, Office of
Media Relations, Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis, and Office of Workplace ¹³
Diversity.
In 2003, the FCC adopted a five-year strategic plan promoting six goals relating to broadband,
competition, spectrum, media, homeland security, and FCC modernization. In September 2005,
the FCC updated this plan with new descriptions of each goal and incorporating “public safety” ¹⁴
into its homeland security goal. The latest status report on the strategic plan was presented at an ¹⁵
FCC open meeting on January 17, 2008. According to the plan:
• Broadband. All Americans should have affordable access to robust and reliable
broadband products and services. Regulatory policies must promote
technological neutrality, competition, investment, and innovation to ensure that
broadband service providers have sufficient incentive to develop and offer such ¹⁶
products and services.
• Competition. Competition in the provision of communications services, both
domestically and overseas, supports the Nation’s economy. The competitive
framework for communications services should foster innovation and offer ¹⁷
consumers reliable, meaningful choice in affordable services.
• Spectrum. Efficient and effective use of non-federal spectrum domestically and
internationally promotes the growth and rapid deployment of innovative and ¹⁸
efficient communications technologies and services.
• Media. The nation’s media regulations must promote competition and diversity ¹⁹
and facilitate the transition to digital modes of delivery.

¹²^For^a^dditi^ona^l^inf^o^r^m^a^{tion o}ⁿ^t^hⁱ^s^bur^e^a^u^{, w}^h^ic^{h w}^a^s^f^o^r^m^a^l^l^y^e^s^t^a^blis^he^dⁱⁿ^Se^pte^m^be^r²⁰⁰^6,^ple^a^s^e^r^e^f^e^r^to
^http:^//www^.fc^c^.^g^o^v^/^pshs/.
¹³^Re^s^ponsⁱ^b^ilit^ie^s^of^each^o^f^th^{e o}^f^fⁱ^ce^{s is d}^e^tailed^oⁿ^liⁿ^e^{at th}^e^{FCC w}^e^b^s^{ite at h}^ttp^://w^ww^.^f^c^c^.g^o^v^/^a^b^o^u^t^u^s^.h^tm^l.
¹⁴^T^h^{e F}^{CC S}^t^rat^e^gi^{c P}^l^aⁿ^{s f}^o^{r F}^Y²⁰⁰³^-F^Y20⁰⁸^and^F^Y²⁰⁰⁶^-F^Y²⁰¹¹^{are avai}^l^a^b^l^{e o}ⁿ^lⁱⁿ^{e at}^ht^t^p^:^/^/^www^.^f^cc.^go^v/^o^m^d^/
^s^t^r^a^te^gⁱ^c^p^la^{n/. T}^h^e^Str^a^te^gⁱ^c^P^l^aⁿ^s^pr^ov^ide^a^g^o^{od r}^e^f^e^r^e^nc^e^f^o^r^the^ba^c^k^g^r^ound,^mⁱ^s^sⁱ^{on, a}ⁿ^d^g^e^ne^r^a^{l g}^o^a^l^s^of^the^FC^C^.
^T^h^{e S}^t^rat^e^gi^{c P}^l^an^al^{so co}ⁿ^t^aiⁿ^s^a^m^o^{re d}^e^t^aⁱ^l^e^d^b^r^eakd^o^wⁿ^an^d^dⁱ^s^c^u^ssi^oⁿ^o^f^each^o^f^t^h^{e o}^b^j^ectⁱ^v^{es t}^h^at^co^m^p^ri^{se each}
^go^al^.
¹⁵^T^h^{e p}^r^esen^t^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^f^o^{r t}^hⁱ^s^m^eetⁱⁿ^{g are av}^ai^l^a^b^l^{e o}ⁿ^lⁱⁿ^{e at}^ht^t^p^:^/^/^www^.^f^cc.^go^v/^real^au^dⁱ^o/^p^r^esen^t^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^/²⁰⁰⁸^/⁰¹¹⁷⁰⁸^/^.
¹⁶^FC^C^Str^a^te^gⁱ^c^P^l^aⁿ^,^FY²⁰⁰⁶^-^F^Y²⁰¹^1,^p.³
¹⁷^Ibid^.
¹⁸^Ibid^.
¹⁹^Ibid^.

• Public Safety and Homeland Security. Communications during emergencies
and crises must be available for public safety, health, defense, and emergency
personnel, as well as all consumers in need. The Nation’s critical
communications infrastructure must be reliable, interoperable, redundant, and ²⁰
rapidly restorable.
• FCC Modernization. The FCC shall strive to be a highly productive, adaptive,
and innovative organization that maximizes the benefit to stakeholders, staff, and
management from effective systems, processes, resources, and organizational
culture.

Proposals for change at the FCC can be characterized as either “procedural” changes that focus
on the manner in which the agency conducts its business or “substantial” changes that focus on
the manner in which the FCC regulates the communications industry.
Some of procedural changes under consideration would require new legislation (e.g., Sunshine
rules), while others could be achieved through internal FCC action.
The FCC often adopts orders and issues press releases with a summary of the order weeks or even
months prior to releasing the order itself. For example, the Triennial Review, which dealt with
controversial issues relating to competition in the local telecommunications market, and the 800
MHz order, which dealt with controversial and technically complicated issues related to
interference to public safety communications, were released six months and one month,
respectively, after they were officially adopted by the Commission. Some congressional
policymakers have discussed instituting a “shot clock,” which would require the FCC to issue the
actual order within a set time frame after it adopts the order and issues a press release.
Under current “sunshine laws,”²¹ only two commissioners may meet outside the construct of an
official “open meeting.” While such a requirement, in theory, promotes open discussion of issues
under consideration, in reality, most Commission business is conducted by circulating drafts of
orders for comment. Further, the open meeting requirement may actually hinder discussion

²⁰^Ibid^.
²¹^T^h^e^G^ove^rⁿ^m^e^{nt in t}^h^e^S^uns^hi^ne^A^c^{t, P}^.^L^.⁹⁴^-⁴^09,^w^a^s^pa^s^s^e^{d in 197}^6.^I^t^r^e^q^u^ir^e^s^tha^t^a^l^l^f^e^de^r^a^{l ag}^eⁿ^cⁱ^e^s^w^{ith uni}^ts
^th^{at w}^o^rkⁱⁿ^d^e^p^eⁿ^d^en^tly^o^f^each^o^t^h^e^{r h}^o^ld^th^{eir m}^eetin^g^sⁱⁿ^p^u^b^l^{ic sessio}ⁿ^.^T^h^{e b}^ill^ex^p^licitly^d^e^fⁱⁿ^e^d^m^eetin^g^s^as
^essen^tⁱ^a^l^l^y^an^y^gat^h^eriⁿ^g.^M^aⁿ^y^fed^e^ral^agen^ci^es,^m^o^stⁿ^o^t^ab^l^y^t^h^eⁱⁿ^d^e^p^eⁿ^d^eⁿ^t^regu^l^a^t^o^ry^agen^ci^es,ⁱⁿ^cl^udⁱⁿ^{g t}^h^{e F}^CC,
^a^r^e^he^a^d^e^d^by^m^u^ltiple^c^o^m^mⁱ^s^s^ione^{rs. T}^h^e^s^e^a^g^eⁿ^cⁱ^e^s^m^a^k^e^m^o^st^of^theⁱ^{r de}^cⁱ^sioⁿ^{s thr}^oug^h^disc^ussⁱ^{ons a}ⁿ^{d v}^o^ti^ng^by
^t^h^{e bo}^ard^o^r^co^mmⁱ^ssi^oⁿ^m^e^m^b^er^s.^T^hⁱ^s^l^a^w^w^a^s^creat^ed^so^t^h^at^t^h^ese^m^eetⁱⁿ^gs^w^o^u^l^d^b^eⁱⁿ^t^h^{e pu}^b^lⁱ^c^d^o^m^aiⁿ^f^o^{r al}^l^t^o
^re^vⁱ^e^w^.^A^dditio^na^{l i}ⁿ^f^o^rm^a^{tion o}ⁿ^th^{is la}^w^is^a^v^a^ila^ble^online^a^t^ht^tp://w^ww^.e^v^e^r^y^thing²^.c^om^/
^inde^x^.^pl?ⁿ^ode^_id=¹¹⁶¹¹³^9.

among the commissioners, especially in cases where the disagreement on the draft is significant.
In such cases, it might be possible for further compromise if a third or fourth commissioner could
be involved in the discussion. While the FCC cannot institute such changes without
Congressional amendment to current sunshine requirements, it could be useful to study how other
agencies, which do not employ circulation as much as the FCC, work through contentious issues
on their agendas. Senator Ted Stevens, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation, has stated that he believes the current sunshine requirements “push
too much power to the staff, and it does not allow more than two commissioners to be in the same ²²
room at one time ... it really is the sunshine law gone awry.”
At a February 1, 2007, hearing on the state of the communications industry, Senator Ted Stevens
mentioned that he and Senator Daniel Inouye planned to introduce a bill that would exempt the
FCC from certain provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, which currently prohibits ^th
more than two commissioners from meeting to discuss a pending issue. In the 109 Congress,
H.R. 5252, reported out of the committee in June 2006, contained provisions that would have
allowed all members of the commission or at least one member of the political party whose
members are in the minority to meet in private.
Some of the basic work of the FCC affects the every day function of the telecommunication
industry (e.g., license transfers for mergers and sales and license renewals). Some policymakers
have expressed concern that these processes take too long to complete. Similar to views
concerning more complicated regulatory actions such as rulemaking proceedings, these
policymakers believe there should be a strict time limit on how long these actions may take to
complete. Such time limits, they state, would provide further operational certainty within the
industry.
Enforcement of agency rules is currently the responsibility of the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau.
Previously, enforcement responsibilities were held by a division within each bureau. For example, ²³
enforcement of “slamming” was done by a division within what was then the Common Carrier
Bureau (now called the Wireline Competition Bureau). Some policymakers have questioned
whether the current “unified” structure is more effective than the previous “diversified” structure
and have suggested studying the issue.
While the changes discussed above could be made by the FCC absent Congressional action,
other, more significant changes would likely require the passage of legislation. In fact, the FCC

²²^“^S^te^v^e^{ns to Co}^nti^nue^Lⁱ^steⁿ^ing^S^e^{ssions, But}^Se^e^s^T^e^l^e^c^o^m^m^unic^a^{tions B}^ill^by^Jul^y^,”^Da^il^y^Re^{port for Ex}^e^c^u^tiv^e^s^,
^{No. 5}¹^,^Ma^rc^{h 1}⁷^,²⁰⁰⁵^,^P^a^g^e^A^-^{1. T}^h^{is a}^r^tic^le^is^a^v^a^ila^ble^oⁿ^line^a^t^http^://i^pp^ubs.^bna^.c^om^/IP/^BN^A^/^de^r.nsf^/
^Se^a^r^c^h^A^llVie^w^/^96C⁵⁶⁹^42C⁰⁹^2C^93B⁸⁵²⁵⁶^F^C⁷⁰⁰^14F¹¹^F?^O^p^eⁿ^&^h^ig^hlig^ht=^F^C^C^,^SU^N^S^H^I^N^E^.
²³^“^S^la^m^m^ing”^is^the^ille^g^a^{l pra}^c^tic^e^of^c^h^aⁿ^gⁱ^ng^a^c^ons^um^e^r’s^te^le^phone^s^e^rv^ic^e^,^w^h^e^t^he^{r loc}^a^l^{, i}ⁿ^tra^l^a^t^a^s^e^rv^ice^,^or
^inte^r^l^a^t^a^s^e^r^v^ic^e⁽ⁱ^nc^ludi^ng^s^t^a^t^e^{to s}^t^a^t^e^,ⁱⁿ^s^t^a^t^e^a^nd^inte^rⁿ^a^t^io^na^{l l}^ong^dis^t^aⁿ^c^e⁾^{, w}^ithout^pe^r^m^is^sⁱ^{on. Se}^e
^http:^//www^.fc^c^.^g^o^v^/^sla^m^mⁱ^ng^/^f^o^{r a}^dditi^ona^l^inf^o^rm^a^tion.

has restructured over the past few years to better reflect the telecommunications industry, but it is
still required to adhere to the statutory requirements of its governing legislation, the
Communications Act of 1934. Title I of the 1934 Act gives the FCC the authority to structure
itself in the manner it believes will allow it to best fulfill its responsibilities; however, from a
practical standpoint, the FCC may not be able to restructure to the extent needed to implement
significant changes unless changes are made to the 1934 Act itself.
Some policymakers have been critical of the FCC and the manner in which it regulates various
sectors of the telecommunications industry—telephone, cable television, radio and television
broadcasting, and some aspects of the Internet. These policymakers, including some in Congress,
and various interest group and think tank experts, have long called for varying degrees and types
of reform to the FCC. Some have called for significantly downsizing the agency by eliminating ²⁴
its regulatory functions and transforming it into an enforcement agency. Others have suggested ²⁵
abolishing the agency and parceling out its functions to other agencies. Others still call for more
regulation (e.g., indecency).
For additional information about changes to the regulation of various telecommunications
services, see CRS Report RS22444, Net Neutrality: Background and Issues, by Angele A. Gilroy,
and CRS Report RL33034, Telecommunications Act: Competition, Innovation, and Reform, by
Charles B. Goldfarb.

CRS Report RS22444, Net Neutrality: Background and Issues, by Angele A. Gilroy.
CRS Report RL33034, Telecommunications Act: Competition, Innovation, and Reform, by
Charles B. Goldfarb.
CRS Report RL33542, Broadband Internet Regulation and Access: Background and Issues, by
Angele A. Gilroy and Lennard G. Kruger.

²⁴^Se^e^,^f^o^r^e^x^am^ple^,^“^H^ow^{to R}^e^f^o^r^m^the^FC^C^,^”^by^R^a^ndolp^h^J^.^Ma^y^,^J^une²¹^{, 2}⁰⁰⁴^{, a}^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^h^ttp:^/^/^ne^w^s^.c^o^m^.c^o^m^/
^H^o^w⁺^to+^r^ef^or^m⁺^the⁺^F^C^C^/²⁰^10-¹⁰⁷^1_^3-⁵²³⁶⁷¹⁵^.htm^l.
²⁵^For^e^x^a^m^ple^,^unde^r^s^u^c^h^a^s^c^eⁿ^a^r^{io, t}^h^e^FC^C^w^oul^{d n}^o^l^ong^e^r^be^r^e^s^pons^ib^le^f^o^r^r^e^vⁱ^ew^ing^a^{nd a}^ppr^ov^ing^m^e^r^g^e^r^s
^b^e^t^w^een^co^m^p^anⁱ^e^s;ⁱⁿ^st^ead^,^t^h^e^Dep^a^rt^men^t^o^f^Ju^stⁱ^{ce w}^o^u^l^d^p^r^o^vⁱ^d^{e an}^tⁱ^-^t^r^u^s^t^revi^ew^.^S^ee,^e.^g.^,^“W^h^y^t^h^{e F}^CC
^Sho^u^ld^Dⁱ^e^,^”^by^D^e^c^l^aⁿ^Mc^C^u^lla^g^h^{, J}^une^7,²⁰^04,^a^v^a^ila^ble^onl^ine^a^t^htt^p^://^ne^w^s^.c^o^m^.c^o^m^/²⁰^10-¹⁰^28-⁵²²⁶⁹⁷⁹^.htm^l;
^an^d^“L^a^w^an^d^Di^so^rd^erⁱⁿ^Cy^b^e^rsp^ace:^A^b^o^lⁱ^s^h^t^h^e^F^{CC and}^L^e^t^Co^mm^oⁿ^L^a^w^Ru^l^e^t^h^{e T}^e^l^eco^s^m^,^”¹⁹⁹⁷^,ⁱⁿ^f^o^rm^atⁱ^oⁿ
^a^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^http://w^w^w^.phube^r.c^o^m^/^hube^r/^c^l/c^l.htm^.

^P^a^tr^{icia Mo}^loⁿ^e^y^Fⁱ^g^l^io^la
^Specialis^{t i}ⁿ^In^terⁿ^{et an}^{d T}^e^lecom^m^unications
^P^o^licy
^pfⁱ^g^lⁱ^ol^a@^crs^.^l^o^c.g^o^v^,^7-²⁵⁰⁸