ntom

Ideas Posted

ntom

How is this going to be paid for?

Go read what they have to say...

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3458:

This is good, well good to a point, still need to pay for enforcement.

Remember our country is broke.
I know, I say broke a lot, it sounds better than our country is in so much debt,
that your unborn children owe the country 300 thousand dollars...

So how to pay for this???

the other two things that are written that will affect this are here as well.

Comments (23)The Open Internet & Innovation

Vote Up

-14

Vote Down

FCC say's...

ntom

Since I can only access some of the FCC web site it makes it hard to figure out what is actually wrong.
What I see is in affect to a certain point already... Comcast is being sued, the others are being told to be fair with their servers...
and they state they may make changes after the court cases.. sooo how much good is this talking thing...rofl

http://www.fcc.gov/

Off the FCC pages this is from the 1996 rules and regulation page...

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 products and services.

If and only If they do this I am ok with this, to a certain point, it still is going to cost a country that has no money a large sum
The big question is how to pay for the extra 40 or so people they are going to need to implement this..

Another question is in a couple paragraphs they state they can make changes as they deem fit.. that sentence scares
me a lot.. If they took that sentence, it is twice written that I found, I will agree with the Neutrality bill/law.. to a certain point.. prove how it is paid for without raising my taxes.
The way it is written right now, from what I have read, I am sure it is not the true copy,
the government could impose certain rules without notice that could affect connections outside the USA, or even within our own borders.
So I still say No, until those provisions are taken out,,, the rest I agree with since it is to help promote competition like I and others have been saying.. and if you do run into a server that is dogged by bandwidth you write the FCC they contact the owner, the owner and the FCC figure it out. I like that, cause it will keep the internet the way it is and improve some of the slower servers.

I also see since 1996 the law has been protecting the users, all you have to do is send in a complaint and they take over.
If you go read you will see they are still in court on many cases, including what you have been complaining about on this forum.(comcast and such)

The biggest issue I have is COST, how when our country is beyond their own legal budget already? and yes most of the congress and senate that are in office today voted to set that budget and now they are breaking it. So how is this going to be paid for?????

The PDF files suck, read the word copy.
The FCC cannot even have decent loading PDF files on their own website..and some of the word pages don't tell you anything but they have a link to the PDF files that don't load...
Makes me wonder if they can do what they are trying to do.. tell me if you can get to the PDF files before a timeout...

Comments (0)The Open Internet & Innovation

Vote Up

-59

Vote Down

I do not understand why.

ntom

I AM SO CONFUSED

I don't see what you guys are talking about.. I get everywhere I want to get, don't you?
No site has ever blocked me (that I know of). I changed ISP's a couple times and did not have
problems there either.. I do not see what is wrong with this system now.. I just don't.
The people that pay for the site(property) should have control over their site not the government.
Should they not?
I mean it is their money they spent, should they not be able to control it themselves?

Bandwidth? I can get as much bandwidth as I want or need.

The person that bought the server that you "travel through", also bought the line access, and sells
the access to you, is this not how this country's economics works? The person that owns the service should have the right to refuse service to you. That is America folks.. just like the store down the street, the have, the right to refuse you service.

There are free antivirus, free firewalls, free things to do and see, I don't understand....
The right to speak out on forums like this one, will they take that away if we give the control to them?
The right to go to a foreign web page, will that be blocked?
They say they want to open up the web, also said they did not want to buy an auto company and a lot of other things....did they not? and you still trust them....???

I know the Government(military,and college's) created the net, they opened it up to the public, let it stay open to the public..if they wanted the control they would have kept it.. it helped the economy to open it up.
One of you state it is like a highway, well the states could not coordinate where the end
of the roads met, the fed stepped in to help, and food and goods are transfered over them, not information.
The net is already world wide we don't have to connect the ends of the roads.. there are no dead ends on the web.. that I have found...unless you count password protected areas... rofl.

Every time the Government says FREE it is a cost of living increase!!!!

The price has been fair, and the net has increased peoples ability to find work, buy goods,
find local and national and international information.

Why depend on the government to do everything, the Government was designed to depend on you.
I like the freedom the web has given me, why change what has worked?
I am not some rich snob, I just don't understand why you people want the Government to control everything.
We are not a socialistic country if we were we would not be the country we are and have been.
I truly believe to give the net "back" to the feds is giving another freedom away.

What were you saying this during the .com boom.?
Were you asking for Government control then?
Were you one of the people that were waiting in line for Obama's give away hoax?
Do you know where the money for this comes from?
Do you really want to increase the cost of living and taxes that much?

How is a broke country going to reimburse all the private people for the servers
and access they pay for that we use to connect to this?
Or do we just get another tax and still have to pay for access? or do we just rip them off?
How is the Government that is BROKE (NO CREDIT LEFT) gonna pay for this???

I am just confused and have been happy with the web since I got on it.. years and years ago....

Thanks for letting me say my piece, and I await your long winded answers, hope they are short and sweet...hehe

Comments (7)The Open Internet & Innovation

Displaying 1 - 25 of 323 Ideas

12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10….12 13 Next »

Comments Posted

ntom 1 month ago

This is what you people want(see article below)???
I still say NO... not this...
The guy is nuts and if this "open Internet" goes through
with the 'new text' that is written He will have way too much control over what people can say here and anywhere on the web.
The regulations that are im place are working...
why "fix" what works?
Want more speed? then pay more, simple it cost the provider more for you to go faster so why can they not charge more?
Don't like the service call another company...
That my friend is simple economics.. Called Capitalism (the thing this country was based on.).

Someone said they only get one or two options for the web..
hmmm.. I live on an island.. about 100 miles (either a boat or a plane will get you here)from anywhere..
we have at least 5 ways to get on the net... if you don't,
then call a grant writer, call ITT tech, and get yourself some of that stimulus money. Start your own ISP.. and see what it takes...
I do not run an ISP, I have no stock in an ISP, I just know
the internet right now is NOT BROKEN... we may not be up to speed
but it works.. and by the way, if you go READ the CONSTITUTION the internet is not a "right", it is a "privilege"!!!

The Declaration of Independence "should" explain the rest too you.

**"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"**

priv·i·lege = A special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste.

Steve Watson Friday, Jan 15, 2010
"Obama’s information czar wants to tax or ban outright, as in make illegal, opinions and ideas that the government doesn’t approve of. Sunstein’s definition of a “conspiracy theorist” encompasses those who question manmade global warming and, most bizarrely, anyone who believes that sunlight is healthy for their bodies."

For every action there is a reacton:

Punitive taxes on cigarettes resulted in smuggling and a black market that harmed legitimate businesses.

Banning of Alcohol crimminals made millions from bootlegging.

Number of DUI's increased after smoking was banned in bars because smokers drove to jurisdictions that did not have smoking bans.

Food handling: Indiana effectively renedered potluck dinners.. as illegal..

The Post office was a profitable business until the government took over...

When you lend your power to someone there is nothing to stop them from using it against you.

notice no personal attacks.. hmm. don't have to attack anyonw
just have to put the truth on the page...

again I say NO... not the way it is written..take the power out of the hands of ONE man and I will agree.. but I still want to know what is wrong with the regulations that are in place...

ntom 2 months ago

river_wind 18 hours ago
ntom: Your dislike for the government with regards to gun rights seems to have confused you with regards to *this* issue. The Net is currently neutral. Keeping it neutral is not some great conspiracy to take away your constitutional rights.

How in the hell can trying to stop someone from breaking/changing the costitution and the bill of rights be dislike for our Government?

I will repeat the part you pulled the "gun rights" from...you take less than the first sentence and "attack" me.. read it before you "attack" understand what is being said before you jump... go read the "bill/law" not just what the people are telling you.. this guy( Obama's buddy) wants to take FREE SPEACH AWAY FROM YOU!!!!

Cass Sunstein, as Regulatory czar, has already called for strict restrictions on gun ownership, an internet “Fairness Doctrine”, and an effective ban on free speech where dissenting opinions to those of the government are expressed. In effect, the information czar wants to tax or ban outright, as in make illegal, opinions and ideas that the government doesn’t approve of.

He only changed his mind after being pressed from people in high places.. to then come back and state he thinks his idea is unconstitutional... and I am the one that hates the government?
Sounds to me like this guy wants to control what you can print and read on the internet.. is that open and neutral?

THIS LINK IS TO THE STORY I SUGGEST YOU READ IT:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obamas-favorite-for-supreme-court-justice-sunstein-wants-to-ban-guns-free-speech.html

Then look at the link to the speach itself (in the story)and read it...
Then, I think, you should go study what the constitution say's... you should read it, then go and learn about why this countries founders gave more power to the PEOPLE and the STATES, then they kept for the Federal Government..

EDUCATION NOT REGULATION!
COMPETITION WILL MAKE THE BUSINESS PLAY FAIR!

ntom 2 months ago

This administration.. that came up with this site has this idea about your "open internet"
do you really want them to have "more control" ...?
Look at what these people want to do and ask yourself.... is not what we have better than this idea?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obamas-favorite-for-supreme-court-justice-sunstein-wants-to-ban-guns-free-speech.html

Cass Sunstein, president Obama’s appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
His close personal relationship with Obama
as Regulatory czar, has already called for strict restrictions on gun ownership, an internet “Fairness Doctrine”, and an effective ban on free speech where dissenting opinions to those of the government are expressed.
In effect, Obama’s information czar wants to tax or ban outright, as in make illegal, opinions and ideas that the government doesn’t approve of.
Sunstein’s definition of a “conspiracy theorist” encompasses those who question manmade global warming and, most bizarrely, anyone who believes that sunlight is healthy for their bodies.

Sunstein advocates Internet censorship via enforced and regulated links in news pieces to opposing opinions.
Sunstein himself later retracted that proposal, explaining that it would be “too difficult to regulate [the Internet] in a way that would respond to those concerns”, and admitting that it was “almost certainly unconstitutional.”

Sunstein has also called for the re-writing of the First Amendment,

ntom 2 months ago

First, go read the constitution, learn what it really say's about how much "control" our government is supposed to have.

Next read this: Our country was based on this:

Capitalism
Capitalism is an economic theory which stresses that control of the means of producing economic goods in a society should reside in the hands of those who invest the capital for production. It is a system based on the production of goods and services for exchange rather than use. Private ownership and free enterprise supposedly leads to more efficiency, lower prices, better products.

Competition will bring the price down and keep the internet "open", like I have said before, you don't like your ISP because they are "slowing" you down?
Then go to another or start your own.. the stimulus bill will help you if you act now.
(The bill one of our past Presidents would have vetoed). Lets see who the history buff is.. lol.
There is no need for the government to "police" any more than they do, 20,000 complaints(about one company) started this whole discussion... out of how many internet users???

Then go read this guys post:
http://openinternet.ideascale.com/a/ideafactory.do?id=6017&mode=top&discussionID=10095

Next "some other President and his staff came up with the Sedition Act,
which by the way would put most liberal bloggers in jail.
This administration, since they have been in campaign mode has used this Presidents words.
That is what scares me.

ntom 2 months ago

ar103 you don't deserve an answer.. Name calling gets people nowhere.. end of "conversation".

ntom 4 months ago

I state again my internet service is less expensive and better..

What do I have to go get Profit and Loss statements?

Yes the profit looks big as one number, but break it down..
53 cents a share DOWN from 57 cents a share... AT&T

Do I have to go get more?

All I asked is how is this going to be paid for when the country has no money. So far, I feel like I am being attacked for asking.

So I state my reason for asking, it will cost the country money that money has to come from somewhere, the customer is the one that ends up paying or being taxed. That is how business works.. that is how these company's got as big as they did... that is how I am able to survive right now...and to boot, I agree with you, we need some protection.

I just don't know how, without raising my cost or quality of living.. and you cut me to pieces...
again I thank you.

ntom 4 months ago

I know exactly what taxation is I have been paying taxes and thinking about taxes for quite a few years, and before I fell ill I was owner of a successfull business.
I know how taxes and business work!
When I had to pay more for L&I, I had to raise my price,
When the state raised my business tax, I had to raise my price.
When the city rasied it fees for my sign I ate it so I did not have to raise my price, but it was a small amount.
When the minimum wage went up I had a choice, lay someone off or raise my price. I know what will happen if this goes through as written I hope it will have some edits...
Oh and fighting over the infrastructure is a worthless arguement, there is 40 billion on the line for that, already counted as spent.

Go out and see how much it costs to hire an internet technologist and then add that by 40 (40 is my guess at the very least amount of people they will hire)... then tell me where that money is going to come from without raising my cost of living in some way or another.

ntom 4 months ago

Ha Ha now I have another question...
Where are the bottlenecks at?
Has anyone really traced them down?

All I hear is I am talking about the wrong thing,and some silent slams against me personally, but I must have missed the part where it was going to cost nothing....
oh, and since I stated my internet has gone down
in price and my service has gone up, I lie as well...
thanks.

Read what is written, it cost's money to do the net neutral thing..

Our country is BROKE do you know what that means?
BROKE = NO FUNDING!
The Stimulus has already been put into law we can't stop that
and they don't know how to pay for the stimulus either...

So talk to me tell me where I am so far off base?
How to pay for this?

ntom 4 months ago

petteyg359 please go read this post, it will explain the hardware side to you...

Posted By : Jim Snowden
http://openinternet.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/17835-6017

And since I cannot word it any better than Jim, I have taken to liberty to steal his words... I hope he forgives me and does not sue me...:) ::

BEGIN SNIP:

Look, I get it, you want access to the sites you want to not be "blocked". I empathize and do believe that we should be able to access any site out there. But the unintended consequence of managing the network by government decree will slow down innovation and lead to a much worse user experience.

Finally, I go back to one of my original statements. This is not about evil telecom companies trying to keep you from getting to the websites you want. It is not, I repeat, not "the evil telecom companies" against the little guy. This is about two giant industries, with lots of money on each side, going up against each other. On the one side we have the Internet Service Providers (AT&T, Verizon, Cox, etc.) and on the other side the Internet Content Providers (Google, Hulu, AOL, Facebook, etc.)

END SNIP:

ntom 4 months ago

Me: Since I made a mistake,,

Two posts ago:

From the FCC site:
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION

Strategic Plan
2009-2014

Includes what we are talking about.. if I read it correctly.

jos7030831
most people interpreted your question to be how is Net Neutrality going to be paid for (given that this forum is for the proposed Net Neutrality rules, being a smart person I am sure you did read or watch the Chairman's speech before you jumped into the forum to post a comment right?). So yes you got voted down for asking a question, but mostly because it was not related to the topic at hand.

Me again:

So if I did read this correctly, it will include the Government highering 40+ people to implement and enforce it, I just do not think a country that is in debt beyond belief can afford to higher that many high tech. people at high. tech wages...

snip:

The Commission shall continue to hire or redeploy, train, equip, and retain a diverse and expert staff

End snip:

Like I said:
I know what you are trying to say, I want it too, but
I do not know how to implement it without raising costs.

ntom 4 months ago

I have to say I am sorry I have sounded like a stuck up rich boy...
I like the idea, I just do not see how to afford it and there are a few sentences that scare me.

I like the arguments I have read, but I still do not think our country cannot afford it.

I cannot afford to pay more, and my price has been dropping not climbing.
My internet is faster smoother and less trouble than ever before, then I see this...

I see AT&T and Comcast are creating the same type of idea for tv packages..
I see why you want to fight that, cannot you find another ISP?
can't we just close them down by cutting off the business to them?
The Democrats and the Republicans can get thousands of people to march
can't we figure out how to get thousands of people to change ISP's?

I do not know the answer, but I believe, counting on the tax man to keep the price down is not the best way.

ntom 4 months ago

you don't believe me so here goes...sorry about how long when I tried to attach it it did not go...

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION

Strategic Plan
2009-2014

Message from the Chairman

It is my great pleasure to introduce the Federal Communications Commission’s Strategic Plan for fiscal years 2009 to 2014. This document was prepared in accordance with the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 and outlines the Commission’s mission and strategic goals for the next five years.

In accordance with the requirements of OMB Circular A-11, the Strategic Plan contains:

An overarching mission statement;
General goals and objectives defining how the Commission will fulfill major segments of its mission;
A description of the means and strategies that will be used to achieve the general goals and objectives;
A description of the relationship between performance goals in the annual performance budget and the strategic goal framework;
Identification of key factors that could affect achievement of the general goals and objectives; and
A description of program evaluations used in preparing the Strategic Plan and a discussion of future evaluation activities.

I look forward to working closely with Congress, consumers, and the communications industry as the
Commission implements its plan. We are experiencing a unique time for the Commission. Communications technologies are moving from an analog to a digital world, competition is increasing in the communications marketplace, and the convergence of telecommunications services is becoming a reality. I believe the strategy outlined in this plan will allow the Commission to address these and other challenges in the years to come.

Kevin J. Martin
Chairman
Table of Contents

Message from the Chairman .................................................................................................. i

Mission.................................................................................................................................... 1

About the Federal Communications Commission …............................................................. 1

Strategic Goals........................................................................................................................ 3

Goal: Broadband ........................................................................................................ 5
Goal: Competition...................................................................................................... 7
Goal: Spectrum ......................................................................................................... 9
Goal: Media .............................................................................................................. 12
Goal: Public Safety and Homeland Security ............................................................ 14
Goal: Modernize the FCC......................................................................................... 18

Performance Goals for Each of the Strategic Goals ............................................................ 20

Evaluation Plans................................................................................................................... 21
Mission

As specified in section one of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Communications Act) the mission of the Federal Communications Commission is to “make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, rapid, efficient, Nation-wide and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.” 1 In addition, section one provides that the Commission was created “for the purpose of the national defense” and “for the purpose of promoting safety of life and property through the use of wire and radio communications.”2

About the Federal Communications Commission

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) is an independent federal agency directly responsible to Congress. The FCC is charged with regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable.

The FCC is directed by five Commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for five-year terms. The President designates one of the Commissioners to serve as Chairman. The Chairman and other Commissioners oversee FCC activities, delegating selected responsibilities to seven bureaus and ten staff offices.

The Commission staff is organized by function. The Bureaus’ responsibilities include: processing applications for licenses and other filings; analyzing complaints; conducting investigations; developing and implementing regulatory policies; and taking part in hearings. Bureaus and Offices regularly work together and share expertise in addressing issues before the Commission. The Bureaus and Offices can be briefly described as follows:

Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau - educates and informs consumers about telecommunications goods and services and engages their input to help guide the work of the Commission. CGB coordinates telecommunications policy efforts with industry and with other governmental agencies -- federal, tribal, state, and local -- in serving the public interest.

Enforcement Bureau - enforces the Communications Act, as well as the Commission’s rules, orders, and terms and conditions of station authorizations.

International Bureau - represents the Commission in satellite and international matters.

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. The Media Bureau also handles post-licensing matters regarding Direct Broadcast Satellite Service.

Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau – responsible for all Commission activities pertaining to public safety, homeland security, national security, emergency management and preparedness, disaster management, communications infrastructure security and reliability, and other related issues.

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau – responsible for all FCC domestic wireless telecommunications programs and policies, except those involving satellite, public safety communications, or broadcasting. Wireless communications include cellular, paging, broadband PCS, advanced wireless services, 700 MHz, broadband radio service/educational broadband service, microwave, amateur radio, and air-ground radiotelephone service.

Wireline Competition Bureau - responsible for rules and policies concerning telephone companies that provide interstate, and under certain circumstances intrastate, telecommunications services to the public through the use of wire-based transmission facilities.

Office of Administrative Law Judges - presides over hearings and issues Initial Decisions.

Office of Communications Business Opportunities - provides advice to the Commission on issues and policies concerning opportunities for ownership by small, minority, and women-owned communications businesses.

Office of Engineering and Technology - allocates spectrum for non-federal use and provides expert advice on technical issues before the Commission.

Office of the General Counsel - serves as chief legal advisor to the Commission and to its various
Bureaus and Offices.

Office of Inspector General - conducts and supervises audits and investigations relating to the programs and operations of the Commission.

Office of Legislative Affairs - serves as the Commission’s main point of contact with Congress.

Office of the Managing Director - functions as a chief operating official, serving under the direction and supervision of the Chairman. The Managing Director oversees the Office of the Secretary which receives and distributes documents filed by the public through electronic and paper filing systems and publishes Commission decisions.

Office of Media Relations - informs the news media of FCC decisions and serves as the
Commission’s main point of contact with the media.

Office of Strategic Planning & Policy Analysis - works with the Chairman, Commissioners, and
Bureaus and Offices to develop strategic plans identifying short and long term policy goals for the Commission.

Office of Workplace Diversity - advises the Commission on all issues related to workforce
diversity, affirmative recruitment, and equal employment opportunity.

Strategic Goals

The FCC is responsible to Congress and the American people for ensuring that an orderly framework exists within which communications products and services can be quickly and reasonably provided to consumers and businesses. Equally important, the FCC must also address the communications aspects of public safety, health, and emergency operations; ensure the universal availability of basic telecommunications service; make communications services accessible to all people; and protect and inform consumers about their rights. The FCC, in accordance with its statutory authority and in support of its mission, has established six strategic goals. They are:

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 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 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 efficient communications technologies and services.

MEDIA The Nation’s media regulations must promote competition, diversity and localism, and facilitate the transition to digital modes of delivery.

PUBLIC SAFETY AND Communications during emergencies and crises must be
HOMELAND SECURITY 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 rapidly restorable.

MODERNIZE THE FCC 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.

In carrying out its six strategic goals, the FCC has identified performance goals associated with each strategic goal (see page 20 of this document). Commission management annually develops targets and measures related to each performance goal to provide direction toward accomplishing those goals. Targets and measures are published in the FCC’s Performance Plan, submitted with the Commission’s annual budget request to Congress. Results of the Commission’s efforts to meet its goals, targets and measures are found in the Program Performance section of each fiscal year’s Performance and Accountability Report.

The Sections that follow provide the overall objectives for each of the strategic goals. In addition, the means and strategies for achieving these goals and objectives are outlined. Finally, key factors external to the FCC and beyond its control are identified for each goal. These key factors can significantly affect the FCC’s achievement of its general goals.

Goal: Broadband

Vision: 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 products and services

.
Objective 1: The Commission shall promote the availability of broadband to all Americans.

Broadband empowers by providing increased access to information and applications, and increasingly
affordable means to communicate within communities and around the world. The Commission shall
continue to encourage and promote broadband development, deployment, and availability, particularly to
those in rural, low-income, or underserved areas and to persons with disabilities. The Commission shall seek to understand demand for and supply of broadband and to encourage deployment across multiple
platforms to ensure that access is not a barrier to adoption of affordable broadband technologies as they
become available. The Commission shall also foster the availability of broadband services to the public safety community. To meet this objective, the Commission shall work in partnership with state, local, and tribal governments; consumer groups; and industry.

Objective 2: The Commission shall define broadband in a technologically neutral fashion that
includes any platform capable of transmitting high-bandwidth intensive services, applications, and
content.

The definition of broadband shall encompass any advanced telecommunications capability and
advanced services without regard to how such capability or services are provided. Thus, it shall include
wireline and wireless, licensed and unlicensed, and terrestrial and satellite services and facilities. It
should be flexible enough to include future, next-generation high-speed offerings that may not be in use
today, thus taking into account the continually evolving nature of broadband technology.

Objective 3: The Commission shall ensure harmonized regulatory treatment of competing
broadband services.

Robust competition among broadband technologies is key to the further development and maturation of
the advanced services marketplace. The traditional categories of telecommunications and information
services and providers, and the disparate methods of regulating them, may no longer be appropriate. The
Commission shall ensure harmonized regulatory treatment of broadband access services across platforms.
At the same time, the Commission shall ensure that its regulatory approach does not promote one
technology over another.

Objective 4: The Commission shall encourage and facilitate an environment that stimulates
investment and innovation in broadband technologies and services.

Increased public demand for faster, more robust broadband services shall stimulate investment and
innovation. The establishment of policies that reward innovation and investment in facilities and
infrastructure shall lead to further deployment of new advanced telecommunications capability. The
Commission must strive to achieve a balance between providing incentives to invest in and develop
broadband technologies and applications, and maintaining competitive entry and access requirements.
The Commission must be diligent in enforcing any necessary market-opening regulations to ensure that
all Americans have access to high quality, affordable broadband service, while at the same time refraining
from any unnecessary regulation.

Objective 5: The Commission shall continue to monitor the deployment of advanced
telecommunications capability in order to provide ongoing national and international policy
leadership and consumer education in the emerging broadband arena.

Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires the Commission to encourage deployment
of advanced telecommunications capability. To implement this requirement, the Commission has
undertaken regular inquiries to determine whether such capability is being deployed to all Americans on a
reasonable and timely basis and to take action, if necessary, to accelerate broadband deployment. The effective monitoring of developments in domestic and international broadband deployment is critical to the Commission’s ability to provide policy leadership to federal, state, local and tribal governments within the United States, as well as other nations, and to inform consumers about the availability of and advantages of adopting broadband technologies through outreach and education. By studying and understanding what drives broadband adoption in this and other countries, and through participation in international fora, the Commission will be better able to facilitate broadband deployment in this country.

Additional Means and Strategies:

The Commission must employ rigorous, effective policy analysis, innovative rulemaking, and sound
economic decision-making in addressing policies regarding broadband deployment. Furthermore,
working in partnership with state, local, and tribal governments, the Commission must facilitate
discussions among key groups of constituents, including industry and consumer groups, to identify and
establish best practices.

Factors Affecting the Achievement of This Goal:

Technological: Despite significant recent developments, broadband infrastructure is not yet universally
deployed, particularly in rural areas. Some platforms are not suitable for deployment in certain areas of
the country due to physical impediments. As broadband infrastructure continues to develop, it appears that an increasing number of traditional telecommunications services will migrate to broadband platforms.

Economic: From the consumer’s perspective, the retail price of broadband services relative to other
services such as dial-up Internet access has impacted adoption decisions, despite the availability of
packages offering bundled broadband and other services. Some service providers argue that regulatory
requirements increase their costs and reduce their incentive to invest in broadband, placing them at an
economic, and thus competitive, disadvantage. Of particular concern are those consumers in sparsely
populated areas and specialized demographic groups such as minorities and the disabled community.

Legal: The Commission is in the midst of several proceedings regarding the appropriate regulation of
broadband services. Changes to legislation and decisions on pending court cases addressing broadband regulation may affect such regulations, as well.

Organizational: The appropriate policy and regulatory roles for the Commission in the emerging broadband market must be universally and clearly understood throughout the Agency.
Goal: Competition

Vision: 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 consumers reliable, meaningful choice in affordable services.

Objective 1: The Commission shall foster sustainable competition across the entire communications
sector.

The Commission shall implement and enforce policies that ensure that U.S. consumers benefit from
competition in domestic and global services. Domestically, the Commission shall implement rules and
policies that promote open and competitive entry by communications service providers and place primary
reliance on market forces to stimulate competition, technical innovation, and development of new
services for the benefit of consumers. The Commission shall seek to establish a consistent and
transparent regulatory framework across all communications platforms (e.g., wireline, wireless, satellite,
cable) to encourage both intra-modal and inter-modal competition. The Commission shall continue to
engage consumers through its outreach and education initiatives to facilitate informed choice in the
competitive communications marketplace. To ensure that U.S. consumers benefit from pro-competitive
policies worldwide, the Commission shall promote pro-competitive policies in discussions with regulators
from other countries, when participating on U.S. government delegations, and when supporting other U.S.
agencies as they negotiate international agreements that affect telecommunications. The Commission, in
conformance with existing laws and policies, shall identify and eliminate market entry barriers for small
entities.

Objective 2: The Commission shall promote and advance universal service domestically, universal
access internationally, and access to people with disabilities worldwide.

The Commission shall promote universal access to communications services by promoting competition
and encouraging the deployment of efficient communications technologies. The Commission shall ensure
that consumers in all regions of the Nation, including rural, insular, and high cost areas, have access to
telecommunications and information services at rates “reasonably comparable” to rates for similar
services in urban areas. The Commission shall work to ensure efficient and effective management of the
Universal Service Fund to provide high-cost, low-income, schools, libraries, and rural health care with
support and to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. The Commission shall ensure that disbursements from
the fund are used by recipients for appropriate purposes. In addition, the Commission shall work with
industry, other U.S. government agencies, and the states to ensure that access to telecommunications
services and technologies are accessible to persons with disabilities in conformance with existing laws
and policies. The Commission shall engage in regulator-to-regulator discussions and work with other
U.S. government agencies through appropriate international fora to promote universal access and access
for people with disabilities globally.

Additional Means and Strategies:

The Commission shall continue to collect and evaluate information on competition in the domestic and
international communications markets. Commission staff shall continually review the Commission’s
rules to determine what rules need to be implemented, revised, or eliminated to achieve competition

objectives effectively and efficiently. The Commission shall take appropriate enforcement action to ensure compliance with the competitive provisions of the Communications Act and the Commission’s rules. The Commission shall continue to monitor trends in consumer complaints and coordinate with state and other federal agencies in an effort to identify marketplace practices that negatively affect competition. In addition to coordinating efforts described above, the Commission shall seek input from industry,
governmental agencies, and the public concerning issues relevant to competition. In coordination with
other U.S. government agencies, the Commission shall work with regulators from other countries to
promote pro-competitive policies and safeguard U.S. consumers from anti-competitive practices.

Factors Affecting the Achievement of This Goal:

Technological: New technologies are challenging existing regulatory structures domestically and
internationally, while enabling consumers to have access to more services than ever before. For example,
traditional providers of one type of service are increasingly entering new markets by offering voice,
video, and broadband data services that have the potential to compete with incumbent providers of such
services. Mobility and personalization are major trends in communications technology today. Both are
dependent on wireless growth and innovation, as well as ease of interconnection with traditional
networks. Moreover, technological advances are making it possible to share spectrum more intensively.

Legal: Changes to legislation and decisions on pending court cases may affect Commission action in this
area. Legal issues related to spectrum rights continue to be contested.

Organizational: The Commission must conduct effective policy analysis and innovative rulemakings,
adopt sound economic decision-making based on access to current and relevant data in developing
competition policies and rules, and take enforcement action where necessary. The Commission must
consult with industry and maintain ongoing relationships with regulators across the country and
throughout the world. The Commission must provide expert guidance to other U.S. government agencies
regarding communications policy. In order to fulfill its competition goals, the Commission must continue
to recruit or appropriately redeploy, and retain talented attorneys, engineers, and economists, and it must
implement a robust training program to maintain proficiency among its professional staff.
Goal: Spectrum

Vision: The Commission must facilitate efficient and effective use of non-federal spectrum domestically
and internationally to promote the growth and rapid deployment of innovative and efficient
communications technologies and services.

Objective 1: The Commission shall develop, advocate, and implement flexible, market-oriented
spectrum allocation and assignment policies.

The Commission’s allocation and assignment of spectrum must continue to evolve towards more flexible,
market-oriented approaches to increase the opportunity for technologically innovative and efficient
spectrum use and to ensure adequate spectrum is available for commercial, public safety, and other
purposes. The Commission shall conduct rulemaking proceedings to enable new communications
services and more flexible operations within existing services, where possible, and to ensure that public
safety users have adequate spectrum. The Commission shall also evaluate and refine, where necessary, its
spectrum assignment policies and procedures, including but not limited to its auction processes. The
Commission shall work with other regulators around the world to promote the importance and benefits of
implementing market-oriented spectrum reforms. The Commission shall also work with the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Department of State to develop
proposals for reforming the processes and policies of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
so that international spectrum allocations can be updated on a more timely and flexible basis.

Objective 2: The Commission shall develop policies that promote efficient and effective use of
spectrum.

The Commission, through its rulemaking proceedings, shall take steps to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of spectrum use. These steps may include, for example, (1) accommodating shared use of
spectrum by compatible users; (2) exploring new and innovative licensing models that reduce entry
barriers; (3) fostering interoperability for public safety communications; (4) minimizing harmful
interference; and (5) encouraging the development of new technologies, such as software defined radio,
cognitive radio, dynamic frequency selection, and new protocols (e.g., Internet Protocol based). The
Commission shall work with regulators outside the U.S. to determine steps that may be needed, either on
a global, regional, or bi-lateral basis to encourage more efficient spectrum use.

Objective 3: The Commission shall conduct effective and timely licensing activities, relying on
advanced electronic filing and electronic information access systems.

The Commission shall encourage and, when appropriate, require electronic filing of license and other
applications involving spectrum. The Commission shall also update and improve its electronic filing and
electronic information access systems, as necessary, to streamline and harmonize its licensing and
coordination processes. Applications that are filed electronically can be processed more quickly, relying
more on computer automation and to a lesser extent on staff resources, which often are challenged with
multiple competing priorities. Such disposition of license applications allows communications service
providers to gain access to spectrum expeditiously so that they are able to deploy service to American
consumers more rapidly. The Commission shall ensure that its website continues to provide the public
with the best and most up-to-date information on existing licenses, pending applications, and licensing

procedures. In addition, the Commission shall work with NTIA, the ITU, Canada, and Mexico to explore
ways to improve the sharing of electronic information and the coordination and approval of pending
applications.

Objective 4: The Commission shall develop and implement policies that delineate the rights and
responsibilities of both licensed and unlicensed spectrum users, particularly with respect to harmful
interference.

The Commission shall, where possible, provide for increased sharing of spectrum between services with
similar technical requirements, while ensuring that highly sensitive services (e.g., public safety) are
protected from harmful interference. The Commission shall work, through its rulemaking and other
proceedings, to delineate the rights and responsibilities of spectrum users so that: 1) the potential for
harmful interference can be minimized, especially for public safety communications; and 2) opportunities
for new spectrum uses, including both licensed and unlicensed systems and facilities, can be explored.
The Commission shall work closely with NTIA, as well as regulators in Mexico, Canada, and other
countries, to identify and resolve instances of harmful interference on an international basis and to avoid
harmful interference in the future.

Objective 5: The Commission shall vigorously enforce its spectrum regulations and policies.

The Commission shall vigorously enforce its spectrum regulations and policies to provide certainty to
spectrum users that they will not be subject to harmful interference by the use of devices that do not
comply with the Commission’s technical rules. The Commission shall also vigorously enforce its licensing requirements, including, for example, enforcing EAS rules, enforcing limitations on power output, antenna and tower height, E-911 requirements, and build out requirements, to ensure that licensees are using spectrum efficiently and effectively. In addition, the Commission shall prevent unauthorized use of spectrum through enforcement action.

Objective 6: The Commission shall serve as a dependable information source for Congress,
spectrum users, and regulators around the world on the complex issues inherent in using our
spectrum resources.

The Commission, as appropriate and upon request, shall provide Congress and the Executive Branch with
timely and professional advice and information concerning efficient and effective spectrum utilization.
The Commission shall publish public notices regarding spectrum issues, keep its spectrum-related web
pages current, and conduct conferences regarding auctions and other spectrum matters, so that spectrum
users and other consumers have access to licensing and technical information. The Commission shall
actively participate in the work of the international bodies that deal with spectrum issues, providing our
expertise, knowledge, and recommended approaches to complex spectrum issues.

Additional Means and Strategies:

Commission personnel shall gain technical knowledge of new technologies that impact spectrum use. In
addition to the coordinating activities above, the Commission shall lead discussions with industry,
government agencies, and the public concerning spectrum issues.

Factors Affecting the Achievement of This Goal:

Technological: Explosive growth in new technologies -- particularly handheld and wireless devices -- has
driven demand for new spectrum allocations. Increasing demand for spectrum requires new and
innovative management techniques to allocate, assign, and use spectrum more efficiently and effectively.
Methods for avoiding and mitigating harmful interference, and increasing opportunities for spectrum
sharing and re-use, require further study.

Economic: The competing demands for spectrum require trade-offs between users, including commercial,
public safety, and homeland security. Where spectrum relocation is desirable, crafting economic
incentives for incumbent spectrum users to relocate continues to be challenging.

Legal: Legislation could impact the FCC’s spectrum management policies. Jurisdictional issues between
the agencies charged with spectrum management (in particular NTIA and FCC) and competing demands
might lead to new ways to achieve more efficient spectrum management. Differences among
international and domestic spectrum allocation policies may lead to disparity and inconsistency among
U.S. and foreign licensing processes.

Organizational: The FCC requires substantial investment in human capital to maintain its expertise and
needs to upgrade and replace technical equipment to appropriately deal with spectrum issues and enforce
its rules regarding interference and other technical requirements. The Commission must maintain an
experienced, educated, and knowledgeable technical, legal, and economic staff that is able to keep pace
with technological developments and trends, and promote the implementation of new spectrum
management techniques and policies.
Goal: Media

Vision: The Nation’s media regulations must promote competition, diversity and localism, and facilitate the transition to digital modes of delivery.

Objective 1: The Commission shall develop media rules and policies that achieve statutory policy
objectives in light of significant changes to traditional media services.

Increased competition, changing ownership patterns, converging markets and industries, and deployment
of new technologies have challenged both the legal and economic foundations of the Commission’s media
regulation. The Commission shall examine current rules and make changes as required to accommodate
the policy goals of competition, diversity, and localism within the evolving media landscape. The
Commission shall review its closed captioning and access to emergency information rules to determine
whether the existing rules are adequately serving the needs of individuals with disabilities, and as the
digital transition is completed, whether the applicable rules continue to do so.

Objective 2: The Commission shall encourage the timely development and deployment of digital
services.

The Commission shall continue to provide strong leadership in the transition to digital television and radio, adopting, defending, and enforcing regulations that expeditiously advance the digital transition. In collaboration with industry, consumers, and regulators, the Commission shall seek innovative ways to facilitate the digital transition and bring new services to consumers. The Commission shall support industry resolution of technical issues. The Commission shall review technical rules and resolve and enforce operational issues of media service providers in a timely manner. The Commission shall actively promote the development of television and radio standards in international fora.

Objective 3: The Commission shall enforce compliance with media rules.

The Commission shall enforce compliance with rules that apply to media services. The Commission shall
investigate alleged violations and take enforcement action, where appropriate.

Factors Affecting the Achievement of This Goal:

Technological: Advances in technology create the potential for significant increases in media outlets
available to the public. Integration of technology platforms makes the transition to digital television and
radio technologically challenging and requires coordination among various industries.

Economic: Ongoing changes in the methods of delivering news and entertainment programming may
introduce economic uncertainty and thus, risk, into communications markets. Economic factors may spur consolidation within the media industries that could potentially affect competition, diversity and localism. In addition, the transition to digital delivery modes has required significant up-front financial investment from content providers, service outlets, and equipment suppliers prior to full roll-out of the technology and eventual recouping of investment.

Legal: Court decisions have affected the FCC’s media ownership rules. Congress has mandated
continued review of these rules, which may result in further court challenges. Similarly, Congress has
mandated a transition to DTV that will require coordination with all aspects of the distribution system.
Court challenges of FCC rules and policies to advance the DTV transition may also result. To
accommodate the Commission’s goals, existing bilateral agreements and treaties will need to be modified
and new agreements will need to be negotiated with Canada and Mexico.

Organizational: Commission personnel must have access to current data on industry and forecasts of
future economic trends in order to conduct rigorous and effective policy analysis. The digital transition
requires continuing education of FCC technical staff to maintain an up-to-date understanding of
developments in communications technology. Moreover, to the extent the number of consumer complaints against broadcast stations continues to grow, the FCC must have sufficient personnel (e.g., attorneys and consumer advocacy and mediation specialists) and technological resources to efficiently process such complaints in a timely manner. The FCC will also need to maintain sufficient technical personnel (e.g., engineers) to enforce compliance with technical and operational rules in a timely manner.
Goal: Public Safety and Homeland Security

Vision: 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 rapidly restorable.

Objective 1: The Commission shall develop policies that promote access to effective
communications services in emergency situations by public safety, health, defense, and other
emergency personnel, as well as all consumers in need.

The Commission shall ensure that every segment of the U.S. communications industry, -- digital and
analog, wired and wireless, terrestrial and satellite, IP and non-IP -- regardless of networks and
technologies, does all it can to enhance public safety and homeland security. The Commission shall
facilitate the deployment of 911services and technologies to all appropriate communications networks and
technologies. The Commission shall also take steps to ensure that all segments of the communications
industry have the capability to provide effective and technologically up-to-date public alerts and warnings
to the American public, including those provided through the Emergency Alert System (EAS). Through
these efforts, the Commission shall ensure that all consumers, including consumers with disabilities, have
access to emergency communications.

The Commission shall take actions necessary to eliminate interference to public safety radio
transmissions that endangers public safety, health, defense, and emergency personnel and the public. The
Commission shall also review with its industry and government partners ways to ensure that there is
sufficient spectrum available for public safety communications, and shall consider whether commercial
services and technologies may be used to more effectively address public safety communications needs.
The Commission shall promote and facilitate participation in priority service programs, such as
Telecommunications Service Priority (TSP) and Wireless Priority Service (WPS), which provide national
security and emergency preparedness users priority telecommunications services that are vital to
coordinating and responding to crises. The Commission shall promote and facilitate participation in the
EAS by the full range of communications providers. In addition, the Commission shall effectively
enforce its interference, public safety, and EAS rules.

Objective 2: The Commission shall evaluate and strengthen measures for protecting the Nation’s
critical communications infrastructure.

The Commission shall provide strong leadership to industry and other governmental agencies in the
protection of the Nation’s critical communications infrastructure. The Commission must explore all
available ways to work collaboratively with industry to increase network diversity and redundancy and
maximize the availability, interoperability, and reliability of all communications. The Commission shall
work with industry and government both at home and abroad to establish Best Practices that should be
adopted by communications providers.

Objective 3: The Commission’s policies shall facilitate rapid restoration of the U.S. communications
infrastructure and facilities after disruption by any cause.

Protection of the Nation’s critical communications infrastructure requires that the Commission adopt
policies to ensure rapid restoration of communications after disruptions due to any cause. The
Commission shall work collaboratively with industry, other governmental agencies, and foreign
counterparts to coordinate and engage in outreach to develop standards for Emergency
Telecommunications Services (ETS); to increase awareness of the TSP and WPS programs; to stimulate
participation in the TSP and WPS programs by 911 Centers, first responders, and federal, state, tribal, and
local governmental agencies; to propose ways of making TSP and WPS participation more affordable; to
identify obstacles to TSP and WPS participation; and to recommend changes to overcome such obstacles.
The Commission shall also work collaboratively with the satellite industry and other governmental
agencies to identify and ensure the availability of facilities for restoration of satellite and other services.
In addition, the Commission shall explore all available ways to ensure that all emerging technologies,
networks, and services are reliable, interoperable, redundant, and rapidly restorable.

Objective 4: The Commission shall coordinate with industry and other federal, state, tribal, and
local agencies on matters of public safety, homeland security, and disaster management.

Over 90 percent of the Nation’s communications infrastructure is privately owned. Cooperation and
coordination among industry, public safety organizations, and federal, tribal, state, and local governments
is therefore essential to the successful nationwide implementation of critical infrastructure protection,
public safety communications interoperability, and effective public alert and warning systems.
Accordingly, the Commission shall coordinate with private industry to develop policies that will further
the vision, goals, and objectives of public safety, homeland security, and disaster management.

In order to support national security, emergency preparedness, infrastructure protection, and
interoperability in public safety communications in the communications sector, the Commission shall
work collaboratively and coordinate on outreach with other federal agencies, such as the Department of
Homeland Security, NTIA, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and with state, tribal, local and
foreign governments to implement proper and effective spectrum management, develop rules and policies
aimed at promoting and improving nationwide interoperability for public safety communications, and to
continue to develop a technologically up-to-date EAS. Coordination shall include outreach, particularly to the public safety community, and participating in intergovernmental and industry committees, task forces, and bilateral and international venues. The Commission should work with these groups as partners and strive to communicate with affected industry and governmental groups in advance of proposed public safety, homeland security, and disaster management policy initiatives to solicit input at the early stages of the decision making process. The Commission shall continue to coordinate with the Executive Branch on transactions that involve foreign investment in the U.S. licensees.

Objective 5: The Commission must act swiftly in matters affecting public safety, homeland security,
and disaster management.

The Commission shall always strive to be responsive to all issues, disputes, appeals, and other matters
brought to the attention of the Commission. In matters regarding public safety, homeland security, and
disaster management, the Commission shall strive to act swiftly and responsively. The Commission shall
act expeditiously to respond to the public safety and homeland security issues raised by first responders,
governments, communications providers, and consumers. In the event of crises or disasters, the
Commission shall closely coordinate with industry and other governmental agencies to ensure that
communications for governmental agencies, first responders, industry, consumers, and the disabled
community are maintained at the appropriate level and that restoration efforts commence immediately.

Objective 6: The Commission shall participate in international organizations and conferences to
coordinate protection of the global communications infrastructure.

The communications networks of the United States are part of a larger interconnected global
communications infrastructure. The Commission shall work with other U.S. agencies and private
industry in bilateral and multilateral venues to share information about U.S. preparedness with foreign
government and private sector participants.

Additional Means and Strategies:

Appropriate Commission personnel shall gain technical knowledge of public safety, homeland security,
and disaster management issues, including the impact of various spectrum uses on interference, of new or
evolving technologies, and of existing and proposed best practices for communications providers.
Commission staff shall continually review the Commission’s rules to determine what rules need to be
implemented, revised, or eliminated to provide effectively and efficiently for public safety and homeland
security matters.

Factors Affecting the Achievement of This Goal:

Technological: The U.S. economy and society is increasingly dependent on globally interconnected
communications technologies. Today’s interconnected communications technologies are subject to an
increasing number of threats – natural, man-made, physical and cyber. In addition, the face of
communications is changing as new technologies and services are rapidly developed and deployed. The
challenge is to craft public safety and homeland security rules sufficiently flexible to ensure that evolving
technologies and services develop in a manner consistent with the public’s safety, and that those rules do
not hinder technological innovation or impede the market forces that allow innovative services to thrive.

Networks are interconnected globally, and in the case of satellite networks, may operate outside the
territorial reach of any nation. As a result, networks must be protected from actions initiated outside the
United States. Ensuring the reliability and the safety of our critical systems and networks from such
actions requires a system of international cooperation to facilitate information sharing, reduce
vulnerabilities, deter malicious actors, protect information security, and promote a global culture of
security.

Economic: The globally interconnected nature of many of today’s communications technologies is a
significant contributing factor to the growth of the U.S. economy, but that interconnection also exposes
the network to a wider variety of threats. The current economic climate may make it difficult for
communications infrastructure providers to commit large sums of money to the wholesale improvement
of network protection and redundancy. Again, a challenge is how to provide for homeland security and
public safety without stifling innovation or rendering it uneconomical.

Legal: Legislation, ongoing proceedings, and shared oversight and responsibility for spectrum by federal
agencies may affect the spectrum efficiency standards applicable to public safety and homeland security
entities as well as the availability of spectrum for services that play a role in homeland security and public
safety. A lack of legal means for protecting information on vulnerabilities from public disclosure via
FOIA may discourage service providers from complete candor in discussions with the Commission.

Organizational: The Commission must continually update its knowledge to fully understand national and
international implications of the threats to communications technologies that arise under public safety,
homeland security, and disaster management scenarios. This requires substantial human expertise and
resources. Accordingly, the Commission must maintain an experienced, educated, and knowledgeable
technical and legal staff that is able to stay abreast of technological and policy developments and trends.
The Commission must maintain ongoing, highly integrated relationships with the communications
industries; other federal regulators; and state, tribal, and local regulators who are heavily involved in the
use of spectrum as it relates to public safety. With respect to satellite services, the FCC must continually
update its knowledge and maintain ongoing relationships with the satellite industry and other government
agencies concerning specialized technical issues that might impact the availability or reliability of space-based services.
Goal: Modernize the FCC

Vision: 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.

Objective 1: The Commission shall structure the FCC so that it can flexibly respond to Congress,
consumers, and the communications industry in a timely manner.

The Commission’s regulations touch industries at the vanguard of technological development – media,
telecommunications, and information services. To carry out its mission effectively, the Commission must
ensure that its processes, procedures, and systems are integrated, reliable, and user-friendly. The
Commission must also communicate clearly, openly, and interactively with the public, Congress, the
Administration, other government agencies, and the media about trends in and impacts of various
communication technologies so these groups might actively participate in the Commission’s decision-making process. The Commission shall maximize the use of modern, user-friendly information
technologies as part of these communications.

Objective2: The Commission shall offer employees educational and advancement opportunities.

The Commission shall provide and sustain mission-critical training and development in order to ensure
excellence among a diverse and expert staff. The Commission recognizes the importance of our
employees’ quality of work life on and off the job and shall work to address the diverse range of needs.
The Commission shall also seek the resources and appropriate tools to ensure its staff is physically
protected, maintaining a safe and secure work environment.

Additional Means and Strategies:

The Commission shall develop and implement processes to recognize and reward effective, results-oriented management. It shall also identify ways to leverage and integrate technology in order to
eliminate unnecessary redundancy, and improve stakeholder satisfaction. The Commission shall continue
to hire or redeploy, train, equip, and retain a diverse and expert staff essential to the FCC’s critical
functions.

Additionally, the Commission shall establish and operate internal and external information gathering and
sharing programs that anticipate and respond to the evolving nature of the communications marketplace.

Factors Affecting the Achievement of This Goal:

Technological: Organizational and informational technologies change rapidly in today’s world. This
requires organizations to put processes in place that provide for timely introduction, upgrade, or
replacement of technologies. The Commission must put forward a long-term vision for the strategic use
of technology, while appropriately balancing the flexible introduction of performance-enhancing
technologies with transparent and accountable management of all resources. Ensuring that the
Commission has access to the human resources necessary to properly plan, implement, and evaluate the
use of these technologies is a complementary factor affecting the achievement of the Commission’s
organizational excellence goal.

Economic: The Commission has many opportunities to improve stakeholder and employee satisfaction
and effective mission accomplishment through the introduction of new or the integration of existing
systems and processes.

Legal: As communications technologies rapidly develop and are introduced into the marketplace,
changes to legislation may affect satisfaction of this goal.

Organizational: Carrying out the mission of the FCC requires highly trained, expert staff capable of
assessing and understanding technological and industry trends and enforcing technical requirements with
up-to-date technological tools. Recruiting, hiring, redeploying, training, motivating, and retaining such a
staff is a challenge that the Commission is working hard to meet. By continuing to develop and enhance
an organizational culture that embraces communication, accountability, and learning, the Commission
shall be able to plan and carry out effective change management programs that will lead to full
achievement of its goal of modernizing the FCC.
Performance Goals for Each of the Strategic Goals

For its six strategic goals, the FCC has established twenty performance goals:

Broadband:

Broaden the deployment of broadband technologies.

Define broadband to include any platform capable of transmitting high-bandwidth intensive
services, applications, and content.

Ensure harmonized regulatory treatment of competing broadband services.

Encourage and facilitate an environment that stimulates investment and innovation in
broadband technologies and services.

Competition:

Promote access to telecommunications services for all Americans.

Ensure that American consumers can choose among multiple reliable and affordable
communications services.

Promote pro-competitive and universal access policies worldwide.

Work to inform American consumers about their rights and responsibilities in the competitive
communications marketplace.

Enforce the Commission’s rules for the benefit of consumers.

Spectrum:

Ensure that the Nation’s spectrum is used efficiently and effectively.

Advocate U.S. spectrum interests in the international arena.

Enforce the Commission’s spectrum regulations and policies.

Media:

Develop media rules and policies that achieve statutory policy objectives in light of significant changes to traditional media services.

Enforce compliance with media rules.

Public Safety and Homeland Security:

Promote the reliability, security, rapid restoration, and survivability of the communications infrastructure.

Facilitate deployment of public safety technology.

Establish and maintain a clearinghouse of information for the public safety community.

Modernize the FCC

Become an easier organization to do business with by integrating systems, processes, and
interfaces.

Create and sustain an organizational culture that encourages innovation, accountability, and
continual improvement.

Ensure effective communications with consumers, Congress, the communications industry, and
fellow federal, state, tribal, and local agencies.
Evaluation Plans

The FCC is dedicated to ensuring that both the mission and resources entrusted to it are properly and
effectively managed. The performance of the FCC is evaluated in several ways. The Commission issues an annual Performance and Accountability Report which contains financial and program performance information. For fiscal years 2006 and 2007, the FCC received an unqualified financial audit opinion with no material weaknesses affecting its financial operations. The Commission will continue to strive for high quality financial and performance management as part of its dedication to the proper stewardship of resources.

The Commission’s programs have also been evaluated through the Program Assessment and Rating Tool (PART). The FCC has improved or is in the process of improving its Universal Service Fund programs (Schools and Libraries/E-Rate, High Cost, Low Income and Rural Healthcare), and the Telecommunications Relay Service program through lessons learned in the PART evaluation process. The Commission and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) also completed a PART evaluation of its program “Auctions of Licenses for Electromagnetic Spectrum” in 2006. In 2008, the FCC and OMB completed a PART evaluation of its overall regulatory program, titled “Federal Communications Commission – Salaries and Expenses.” Details on these evaluations can be found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/

Public Comments

In a public notice (DA 08-1472) released June 24, 2008, the FCC announced that members of the public were invited to review a draft of the Strategic Plan for 2009-2014 and provide comments by July 24, 2008. The Commission received four public comments which were reviewed and considered. We incorporated comments where they helped to clarify explanatory portions of the Plan. Those who are concerned with the broad and general nature of the Strategic Plan are encouraged to review the Commission’s Performance and Accountability Reports and the FCC Performance Plans located within the agency’s budget estimates to Congress to obtain more specific details. These documents are located on the Commission’s web site at http://www.fcc.gov/omd/strategicplan/. As the Federal government approaches a change in presidential administrations in 2009, and faces new priorities stemming from legal and technological change, we invite all interested members of the public to visit the FCC home page at http://www.fcc.gov/ for information on the Commission’s initiatives to meet the challenges of the dynamic telecommunications environment.

ntom 4 months ago

ok obvioulsy you did not understand me.

The link I sent, if you "dig" you will find the 2009-2010 plans.
it sounds good .. to a certain point,
that certain point scared me, which made me say no.
Go dig and read... I also attached it to another post but
the attachment did not come through to my post.

2 years ago I was paying more for the same speed than I am now.
My connection is faster and more reliable and more stable...
OH and my price has come down!

The ISP pay's more for the backbone,
you will pay more to commect through him, simple as that.

As for the bandwidth thing you are talking about,
The Stimulus bill has something like 40 billion
for the backbone and to get high speed to places it is not.
We already have to pay for that money so how to afford the
40+ people they say will have to be hired, with our tax dollar.

Again I ask, HOW TO PAY FOR THIS when our Country is BROKE???

ntom 4 months ago

Have you read the thing?

My ISP has to pay more to the government, to do that he raises the price I have to pay.

I am happy with my service, why should I have to pay more?
In fact the price just came down!
So I can be protected from a corporation that has
been lowering the price I pay over the last 2 years?
That has improved my connection and my lines over the last 4 or 5 years?
Why would I fight for the Government to step in?

What has the government stepped into that has lowered the price of anything?

I am hungry, I cannot afford more tax.

ntom 4 months ago

How is this going to be paid for?

http://www.fcc.gov/telecom.html

ntom 4 months ago

How is it going to be paid for??? The way it is written
it will cost oh so much to a country that has totally blown the budget.

That is what I want to know.. HOW IS IT GOING TO BE PAID FOR?

ntom 4 months ago

rickymujica This is your statement in reply to my earlier comment about Bob Kahn::

@ntom: Tim Berners-Lee, the guy who created the internet is strongly for Net Neutrality
Dar, please watch this video by Tim-Berners-Lee. He created the internet and really understands the issue

This is my reply..Long, the most I have written in years...
First the vent.. sorry if it sounds personal but fact is fact...
rickymujica, You just negated your reliablility...your facts are half facts and I am not sure I trust your judgement.

No one person invented the Internet as we know it today. However, certain major figures contributed major breakthroughs:
Leonard Kleinrock was the first to publish a paper about the idea of packet switching in 1961.
J.C.R. Licklider was the first to describe an Internet-like worldwide network of computers, in 1962.
Larry G. Roberts created the first functioning long-distance computer networks in 1965. He also designed ARPANET.
Bob Kahn and Vint Cerf invented the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) which moves data on the modern Internet, in 1972 and 1973. If any two people "invented the Internet," it was Kahn and Cerf - but they have publicly stated that "no one person or group of people" invented the Internet.
Radia Perlman invented the spanning tree algorithm in the 1980s.
The Internet was well-established before Tim Berners-Lee and Robert Cailliau created what is now its most popular application.
Our former United States Vice President Al Gore did not invent the Internet. What's more, he never said he did!
Emeagwali did supercomputing research in the eighties. He contributed to no Internet standards, major or minor
By 1983, TCP was the standard and ARPANET began to resemble the modern Internet in many respects. The ARPANET itself was taken out of commission in 1990. Most restrictions on commercial Internet traffic ended in 1991, with the last limitations removed in 1995.

Those are facts, if you want to know more about each person,
go google them they are all over the web.. or just google
who invented the internet.

I know congress has talked about net neutrality before,
but it got no where because.. if you go back to (HISTORY) "your links" and follow the links on those pages you will see exactly that.. our congress has looked at this before and decided it would be too much government involvment in private enterprise.

This new blocking and slowing the net is new to me and if I was
in that position I would find a grant writer, and create new competition
all it takes is a T-3 or even a T-2 to give decent service.
I know we had to wait a couple years before we had more than two ISP's
but when the others came in the price leveled out and the bandwidth
has been stable.. well as stable as poor old wore out lines can handle...hehe...

Just a thought.. The old rules worked, more competition
is how to control the blockages from these big company's.
I know what you say about sueing them. they have too many
loopholes to protect them .. so.. compete with them instead..

I have pretty much said what I think and how I feel,
I do not really think I have any more that can add to this
discussion in any of the topics..

I asked my questions and got nevative with a couple half answers...
maybe the questions are too hard, or maybe I sounded harsh,
or maybe just maybe you could not answer because it would make you
look like you do not know your facts???

In one post around here somewhere someone came up with a good idea
The darndest thing is I can't find it.. must have gotten negative results because it made sense??? ROFL

ntom 4 months ago

Fins cannot access all the sites we can.. Japan cannot access all the sites we can
China cannot access the sites we can.. that is what Dar has been trying to tell these people.
That is the big fear of letting the Gov. have total control.
I now see their point by reading posts and going out to other sites...but...

There is now money being spent on more cable/wire in areas that do not have cable/wire.. stimulus bill..
The states are mapping the web in each state... stimulus bill..

So now is your chance to say hey we need someone to come in here that is fair
that has access to bandwidth outside of the big 3 ISP's as I see it you are complaining about
and afraid of the other ISP's following suit.. all it takes is more competition so go find yourself
a tech (MIT has a lot that are looking for work), get a business model built asap, and write in for a grant..
take on the company's you are complaining about and force them to be fair...how about that??

Just a thought, I mean they have 40+ billion already on the books as spent on this...
When I thought I was getting slow internet, I just changed providers.. I still don't understand....hhahahahahaha

ntom 4 months ago

This is not about a person it is about the ISP/FCC regulating where we can go on the net.
If you want to get personal with the guy go to his contact form .. that is what it is there for.

ntom 4 months ago

Now this I can agree with. I like this guy.. can the FCC find this post.. it makes sense
the gov. does not get to put up a country wide firewall and everyone here gets what they
have been complaining about.

I thought there were regulations already in place... hmm..
anyone have a link to the regulations that are in place now?

ntom 4 months ago

Bob Kahn, Internet Protocol's co-inventor, has called the term net neutrality a "slogan" and states that he opposes establishing it.
He has warned that "nothing interesting can happen inside the net" if net neutrality strictures become legislation.

Thought you should know.. Look at the source of this one.

ntom 4 months ago

thank you to the few that actually read my post and tried to explain..
the others that just immediately put negative..

My post is questions..one good answer, but I get negative votes.. why?

If you are so intent on pushing my post down the list, then at least have the courtesy of answering
a question.. all you do is make me more confused...rofl

ntom 4 months ago

I forgot.. where is my FREE TELEPHONE ACCESS??????

ntom 4 months ago

ar103

First it is, the administration that stated.. they want control.. what does that mean?
the government wants control over the web.. means if they decide they do not want you to
see something you won't.. look at singapore they do not let the public get to US sites
they want to watch a US tv show they have to go on the web and search and then
they cannot get to see what they want.. IS THAT REALLY WHAT YOU WANT?
Right now if you do not like your ISP you can go to another one without any problems, unless you create your own.
What will happen if the government takes control? If you give the government control..
you do not know what will happen, and again I say FREEDOM IS MORE IMPORTANT TO ME
than to trust our government with my computer... I do not trust our government enough to let them take control.
THEY HAVE ENOUGH CONTROL ALREADY!!!!! Our Government is tooo big already!!!!!

ntom 4 months ago

Haha, well my internet works fine the way it is.
Go read the constitution of the United States of America
and you will see this is not right.
If the Goernment wants to get so big it will die
I don't want that.. do you?
The government should be smaller than it is and this is
another way to take our rights and in the long run it will
raise the cost of living in the United States of America.
Any tax will raise the cost of living.. means less food for me
and you will not be able to buy that toy.. What has the Government stepped into that has not ended up costing more than before they stepped in?????
The government has too much control and too many people
are depending on it. Remeber we came to this country to have freedom
depending on the government is not being free.
AGAIN: GO READ THE CONSTITUTION!!!!
And you that cannot read find someone to read it too you and explain the words.. it is your freedom they are trying to take.
FREE Go see what is really free... you will find.. NOTHING!!!!!

Categories

User Activity Stream

Ideas Posted

Comments Posted