FCC bureau seeks to manage globally
Telecommunications issues make life hard for policy makers because technology keeps changing-rapidly-and because the public's needs keep growing in both number and diversity. Witness the past year's fight over the Tauzin-Dingell bill to provide high-speed Internet access. Magnify those complexities globally, and you have a typical day at the Federal Communications Commission's International Bureau.
"We have a mission in the bureau, and that is, as we say, to connect the globe for the good of consumers," said Donald Abelson, chief of the International Bureau. "We like to conceive of ourselves as the group that brings the message that the FCC is working on domestically to the world, and then we also bring the messages that we get from going to international meetings back to the FCC," he said. "So we see it as basically a two-way street."
The bureau also envisions speeding up authorizations of telecommunications facilities and services, and providing global leadership and efficient management of spectrum, he said.
The FCC, established in 1934, is an independent U.S. government agency directly responsible to Congress. It is charged with regulating interstate and international communications. The commission's jurisdiction is limited to the United States, but as a sign of the global transformation in communications, the International Bureau was created in 1994 to gather all of the FCC's increasing international activities into one place.
"The FCC is domestically focused, as well it should be," Abelson said in an interview with National Journal. But "telecom is a fluid, alive service. It does not stop at all borders."
Now, barely a decade after it was established, the bureau has defined its role as both a tough regulator and a hands-off adviser to U.S. agencies and other governments. U.S. industry sources are quick to cite the value of the FCC on international fronts, but they also wish that it would take more action to help U.S. firms.
Abelson came to the FCC in July 1999 from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, where he earned a reputation as a tough and effective negotiator. There, he led the U.S. delegation to the World Trade Organization negotiations on basic telecommunications services from 1994 to their conclusion in 1997; the talks were widely accepted as a trade success story. Abelson, 52, also negotiated the WTO General Agreement on Trade in Services in 1993 and other deals reaching back to 1977.
"Don is the single most effective international negotiator I've ever met," said Scott Harris, the first International Bureau chief and now a managing partner at law firm Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis. Abelson is the first career government official in the role of bureau chief, who serves at the will of the FCC commissioners. His predecessors had legal, business, congressional, and academic backgrounds, and all left government afterward; Abelson said he has no plans to do so.
Some industry representatives privately express concern about fundamental disagreements between the State Department, Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and the FCC on international issues.
Abelson explained that Congress gave the administration the role of negotiating trade agreements through the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, promoting exports through the Commerce Department, and representing U.S. political interests through the State Department. The FCC can advise on any of these activities and does so when asked, he said.
But at least one industry player is increasingly turning to those other agencies instead of Abelson's bureau to get things done internationally. "The bureau is doing great things, but not as many as they used to," the industry source said. "The things they do, they do well."
Industry, however, has applauded several recent actions the bureau has taken. In March, it ordered U.S. telephone carriers to suspend payments to six Philippine carriers after finding that some U.S. carriers' networks in the country were disrupted when they refused to pay rate increases. The action worked: The Philippine carriers reopened U.S. service, and within weeks the FCC bureau ordered payments to resume.
"They have demonstrated a willingness and effectiveness in weighing in with foreign governments where foreign carriers are acting anti-competitively," said Doug Schoenberger, director of government affairs at AT&T, one of the carriers affected in the Philippine case. "We think that's been critical in protecting U.S. consumers and carriers."
Stepping directly into industry relations is anathema to the FCC, which encourages industry negotiations over charges-called settlement rates-for completing calls in different countries. In 1997, the bureau established benchmark settlement rates based on three levels of economic development among other nations. Now 90 percent of telephone traffic, which is measured in minutes, is settled at or beow the benchmarks (60 percent is below), a development Abelson called "tremendous success." This year, the bureau is reviewing the benchmark policy. In its time the bureau has helped governments open their markets to competition, which sends rates down and use up.
In another well-received action, the bureau adopted a new licensing process last week to speed the delivery of satellite services to customers. The aim is to increase regulatory certainty and expedite the move to digital communications. The FCC also wants to ensure continuing U.S. leadership in the global satellite industry.
The FCC has become omnipresent at international forums involving telecommunications. For instance, FCC officials were consulted on the recently completed free-trade agreements with Chile and Singapore and are prepared to play a role in new trade negotiations, Abelson said.
"The FCC International Bureau provides a viewpoint essential for U.S. positions in multilateral and bilateral meetings," said Jason Leuck, director of international affairs at the Telecommunications Industry Association. "IB staff have worked well with industry and do an excellent job with limited resources."
The bureau's current signature role is perhaps its direct contact with regulators from other countries. "These are very detailed discussions, but they are not negotiations, they are about talking about what we do, and hearing about what they do," Abelson said. FCC officials abroad do not take the position that U.S. law is best for everyone, he said. "We're not so full of hubris that we think we got it completely right" with the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Abelson said. Rather, the United States can share with foreign regulators its seven years of experience under the act, and also learn from their experiences.
Abelson said his experts stand ready to help in Iraq, where the latest figures showed fewer than 13,000 Internet users and no cellphone carriers among the population of 24 million.
"Can you think of a place on Earth that doesn't have a cellphone carrier?" Abelson remarked. The "leadership in Iraq did not want people talking to one another, certainly did not want them talking to the rest of the world-that's Internet."
The International Bureau is split into three divisions in addition to the chief's office: telecommunications and spectrum policy; satellites; and strategic analysis and negotiations.
A top concern of the bureau is the cross-border reach of television and radio signals and coordination of spectrum space with Canada and Mexico. In addition, the bureau deals with undersea cables that reach U.S. shores, and with all incoming and outgoing international phone service. Finally, it takes the lead internationally on satellites.
International debate over accessing the spectrum necessary for wireless and satellite communications is evolving to reflect the blurring line between fixed and mobile services, Abelson said. For instance, a portable laptop computer that can receive a satellite signal is considered fixed, despite its mobility.
Spectrum issues will be among those addressed at the World Radiocommunication Conference, a triennial three-week U.N. gathering in Geneva in June. The U.S. delegation will be led by the newly named ambassador to the WRC, Janice Obuchowski of the Defense Department, but the FCC will be there to advise. In many international settings, the U.S. government pursues a policy of encouraging governments to refrain from heavy-handed regulation.
Every WRC in past years had one central issue that defined the meeting. But largely because of the growth of the Internet and of wireless technologies, this WRC is expected to have dozens of issues jostling for attention, Obuchowski said in a recent speech.
Among the more than 40 agenda items for the meeting is, for the first time, debate on whether to allocate unlicensed spectrum for wireless devices-such as the increasingly popular, high-speed WiFi-to revitalize the flagging telecom industry. The band of spectrum being considered is used for military radar. Six months of technical discussions between the Defense Department and industry resulted in a technology that will protect military communications from interference or interception. The new technology can detect when the radar is turned on and immediately switches the wireless device off the channel to avoid interference. The key has been finding the "sweet spot" that lies between being sensitive enough to protect the radar while not being so sensitive as to render the wireless devices inoperable, an industry source said.
Another, older issue likely to come up again is "prior consent," Abelson said. Some Middle Eastern governments want to be asked before television signals hit their territory; the U.S. position is that satellite transmissions should remain unfettered and that the concerned countries can simply prohibit the sale of dishes that would receive the signals.