Monday, November 17, 2008

FCC Regulation

a. describes Dunbar's theories of "The Spinning Door", "Frequent Flying", and "What occurs behind closed doors" in regards to the Center's investigation into the FCC

The spinning Door: This reflects the findings thatr many employees within the FCC are former industry executives and lawyers, and vice versa. Dunbar uses Dorothy Atwood, former chief of the FCC's Wirelind Competition Bureau and discusses her switch to SBC. He points out that while not illegal there is a serious conflict of interest present when this happens.

Frequent FLying: This refers to the "cozy" relationship between the agency and the industry. The study entitled "On the Road Again-and Again" revealed that the FCC had accepted nearly 2.8 million in travel and ebetertainment over eight years. The FCC coutered this attack saying that they were providing services for small businesses etc.. with some aid that would otherwise cost them too much money but a lot of exoenses were unexplainable. These executives flew first class, stayed at lavish hotels, and reflested a lot of unnecessary spending. Congress has put a cap on the amount of travel the FCC can accept however in an ideal situation, all travel money should come from the agency or from a non profit organization.

Behind Closed Doors: the top decision makers at the FCC often "rub elbows" with those they regulate. Before the FCC deregulated many restrictions, several secret meeting went on with industry leaders like SBC and Viacom. These are officially called ex parte meetings.

b. at the end of the article even chairman Powell says that sometimes industry influence over the FCC has gone too far. Has anything happened since the writing of this article in 2003 to change this?
I do not think that much has really happened since this article. With all the other problems going on in the nation, many just are not that concerned with the FCC. Michael Powell is no longer leading and hopefully our new government will make necessary changes. I agree with Stigler in that regulatory agencies are destined to become beholden to the very industry they are supposed to regulate.

No comments: