July 2005

• "Major Reform of Telecom Act Proposed," InternetNews.com, July 28, 2005.
  "Senator Ensign has produced the most deregulatory communications bill ever introduced in Congress, and commendably so, in light of the vast marketplace changes that have occurred since passage of the 1996 act," said Randy May, a senior fellow at the Progress and Freedom Foundation.
• "Industry Generally Praises Ensign Bill, But Consumer Advocates Criticize It," TR Daily, July 28, 2005.
  The most critical words in the otherwise glowing commentary about the bill came from Randolph J. May, a senior fellow and director of communications studies at the Progress & Freedom Foundation.
  Noting that the measure dodged the "thorny issue" of the USF, Mr. May said, "Ultimately, reform of the universal service regime to direct the subsidies in a more targeted fashion to those who really need them should be part of a comprehensive new Act."
• "FCC May Consolidate Oversight of Wireless Issues," Technology Daily, July 26, 2005.
  "The idea of folding the Wireless Bureau into another part of the commission that would just be focused on regulating services regardless of the technology is a step in the right direction," added Randolph May, senior fellow and director of communications policy studies at the Progress and Freedom Foundation.
• "Data Theft Risk Overblown, Expert Says," Washington Internet Daily, July 25, 2005.
  Despite rampant anecdotal reports, solid data documenting a rise in credit card misuse are "very hard to come by," an Emory U. economics expert said Fri. Offering Congressional staffers a contrarian outlook on data theft, law professor and Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) fellow Paul Rubin said not only has incidence not risen significantly, but research indicates fewer consumers actually are affected by breaches.
• "Comm Daily Notebook," Communications Daily, July 22, 2005.
  Congress should create a 'framework" clearly defining federal, state and local govt. responsibilities in regulating communications, a working group set up by the Progress & Freedom Foundation recommended Thurs. The proposal suggested assigning duties based on expertise at each regulatory level "while recognizing the inherent interstate, and international, nature of the Internet."
• "New PFF Telecom Draft This Week," Telecom Policy Report, July 18, 2005.
  The Progress & Freedom Foundation (PFF) think tank/ study organization is expected to disclose the second of five draft proposals for telecom reform legislation Thursday (July 21), positing it as a model for the U.S. Congress. The upcoming release by PFF's federal-state working group - tackling federalism and states'' rights issues in policy-making - follows the recent regulatory working group's draft paper advocating the FCC adopt a modus operandi and anti-trust ground rules more akin to activities and decisions of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission.
• "Study Says Competitive markets Saved $15B for Consumers; Aims to Counter Market Critics," Power Markets Week, July 18, 2005.
  Groups such as the Cato Institute, the Progress & Freedom Foundation and the Public Interest Research Group have issued reports that challenged the benefits of the current competitive wholesale and retail markets and the role of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
• "Fairness in the Balance -- Public Broadcasting Is Under Scrutiny. Neither Side Seems To Like What It Sees," The Washington Post, July 17, 2005.
  "By accepting the government's money, public broadcasters will never be free of government efforts to control or even censor programming," says Adam Thierer, a senior fellow at the conservative Progress and Freedom Foundation in Washington. "I happen to be one of those people who enjoy what's on NPR and PBS. But when public money is involved, it does mean that strings are going to be pulled in one direction or another."
• "Clinton Calls for Federal Controls on Explicit Video Games," New York Sun, July 15, 2005.
  Some opponents of federal regulations said Mrs. Clinton's plan could have the perverse effect of causing game makers to withdraw from the ratings scheme. "If she was to introduce legislation threatening certain developers with stiff fines, why would they submit those games for ratings?" an analyst with a libertarian think tank, the Progress and Freedom Foundation, Adam Thierer, asked.
• "Go to the Park, Swing onto the Web -- Eastern Iowa Group Plans to Bring Free Internet to Recreational Areas," Des Moines Register, July 12, 2005.
  Critics direct similar concerns toward Philadelphia's $10 million wireless system scheduled to launch next year. Even worse, municipal systems could crowd out companies that would otherwise invest in a community, wrote Adam Thierer in a recent report for Washington analyst, Progress & Freedom Foundation.
• "Grokster Case Debated," Tech Law Journal, July 11, 2005.
  The Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) hosted a panel discussion of Capitol Hill titled "MGM vs. Grokster: What's Next"... (Jim) Delong said that there will be litigation, and some appeals court opinions, implementing the Supreme Court's opinion. He said that P2P network providers will push right up to the line, and the content industry will sue them. He suggested that one issue to be resolved is what is the consequence of P2 providers assisting their users in breaking digital rights management (DRM). He said another would be the consequence of P2P providers offering anti-spoofing filters.
• "New Coalition Forms to Advocate, Educate on Open Network Access," Communications Daily, July 8, 2005.
  Opposing groups said they aren't surprised by the coalition's formation or goals. Progress & Freedom Foundation Senior Fellow Randolph May called the group "just another iteration" of a loose coalition familiar in Washington regulatory debates, with the same "goal of protecting certain competitors" from market pressure. It would be a "shame to turn back the clock" by halting investment in broadband buildouts through below-cost access rates. "We're making a lot of progress now," May said.
• "Verizon VP Says Municipal Networks Unnecessary," Communications Daily, July 5, 2005.
  "Thomas Lenard, Progress & Freedom Foundation research VP asked why, if finding success in the market is so easy, haven't private companies been straining at the bit to compete with Verizon?" He said taxpayers should not have to bear the risk of funding a municipally run network, essentially "forcing taxpayers to become investors."
• "New Tax for Broadband Customers?" CNET News.com, July 5, 2005.
  But Randolph May, a senior fellow at the Progress and Freedom Foundation, a market-oriented think tank, said policy-makers should be cautious before making any changes. Broadband access, he said, is getting cheaper and more widely available.
  "It's not clear that any subsidies are needed," May said. "But if policy-makers want to provide some subsidies, they should be, in my view, carefully targeted to low-income people that really need them."