Wireless Wave: What are your thoughts about what’s happened with wireless communications between that time and now?
CP: Today it’s remarkable. The networks, the coverage, the digital quality…it is just a phenomenal transformation from the first big bulky cell phones to the compact digital devices and their different functions and capabilities. Broadband wireless applications open the door for every critical institution, whether it’s in healthcare, education, or in the economic area, to become a much more efficient,
cost-effective, dynamic environment. The development of applications that you
have through wireless technologies from ten years ago to now is really one of the amazing stories of American economic life.
Wireless Wave: The last time Congress specifically addressed wireless telecommunications policy was back in 1993, which provided competition among carriers to act as the “regulator” of the industry. Going forward, how can Congress build on the success of that ’93 legislation to provide for even more consumer benefit, innovation, and growth in the industry?
CP: Well, we want to make sure that as we move to IP-technology and IP-applications, that wireless, wireline, cable, and voice-over-internet providers each has uniform standards. By that I mean a federal standard of regulation that allows the wireless industry and emerging communications sectors to continue their rapid growth and success. We want to say to the states and the cities that economic
regulation ought to be done at the federal level. We want to make sure that the
encroachment by states into economic regulation, and in some cases non-economic
regulation, does not become a patchwork of regulatory burdens on the wireless industry that stifles and stagnates the tremendous growth in coaumer benefits and choices that we’re seeing. I believe there are also social responsibilities such as 911 and other law enforcement obligations, as well as areas such as universal service, that ought to be done in a uniform federal way. We also want to make
sure that there is continued interoperability and interconnection among networks. One of the great successes of the 1996 Telecommunications Act was to allow wireless companies to have access so they could compete with wireline and amongst themselves. Prices came down, reliability went up, and now there are almost 200 million wireless subscribers in the United States. That’s a fourfold increase in ten years. So it really is a remarkable story and we need to make sure that inappropriate regulations don’t hurt this dynamic industry.
Wireless Wave: A lot of states have turned their sights on wireless by selectively taxing and regulating the industry. Is it in consumers’ best interests to allow that kind of oversight on a state-by-state basis, or on the federal level?
CP: Wireless is truly an interstate and for that matter, an international industry and that’s why it should only be subjected to standards that are uniform across-the-board. Wireless and IP communications providing voice and data applications are interstate and, for that matter, international in nature and therefore should come under clear federal jurisdiction. The uniform taxation policy that was adopted by the 106th Congress is also a good model for how to proceed to make sure that there is not unfair taxation or regulation on a city-by-city or state-by-state basis. The Cellular Telecommunications Uniformity Act that we passed was a good precedent. Just as we have protected the Internet from new taxes, we should protect wireless companies and these other communications companies that are making significant investments in advanced networks and infrastructure that really improve the quality of life and the economic well-being across the country. Unfortunately, many cities and states are looking for new revenues, and that means more taxes. So, simply put, we should not tax and we should not regulate at the local and state level such innovative communications providers as wireless. That should be done with federal policy.
