NEWS Federal Communications Commission 445 12 th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20554 This is an unofficial announcement of Commission action. Release of the full text of a Commission order constitutes official action. See MCI v. FCC, 515 F.2d 385 (D.C. Cir. 1974). News Media Information: (202) 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: (888) 835-5322 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: FROM THE OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER AJIT PAI Brendan Carr (202) 418-2000 February 18, 2015 Email: Brendan.Carr@fcc.gov WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING ABOUT PRESIDENT OBAMA’S PLAN TO REGULATE THE INTERNET “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. The Verizon decision has created an opportunity for the FCC to introduce more rule-making. They shouldn’t. Things have worked well. There is no better platform in the world to start a new business than the Internet in the United States.” Mark Cuban, Internet entrepreneur (Nov. 24, 2014) http://wapo.st/1rc20q1 “[A] pure net neutrality view is difficult to sustain if you also want to have continued investment in broadband networks. . . . If you have these pure net neutrality rules where you can never charge a company like Netflix anything, you’re not ever going to get a return on continued network investment—which means you’ll stop investing in the network.” Marc Andreessen, Co-founder of Netscape Communications Corporation, Andreessen Horowitz, and Ning (May 21, 2014) http://goo.gl/v4WS1k “And ponies! Free ponies for everyone!” Marc Andreessen (Feb. 10, 2015) http://bit.ly/1DsCqQC “President Obama’s call to regulate the Internet as a public utility is like pushing to replace the engine of a car that runs perfectly well.” Michael Mandel, Chief Economist of the Progressive Policy Institute (Nov. 11, 2014) http://wapo.st/1uzx1nf “The State of the Net is imperiled. By Washington. The borderline theological debate over ‘net neutrality’ is breaking the rules and threatening an approach that served our nation well.” Larry Irving, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Telecommunications under President Clinton, and Bruce Mehlman, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Technology Policy under President Bush (Feb. 6, 2015) http://usat.ly/1xBl7Gn 2“[T]he collateral effects of a change in regulatory status . . . will trigger consequences beyond the Commission’s control and risk serious harm to our ability to fund and deploy broadband without bringing any concrete benefit for consumers or edge providers that the market is not already proving today without the aid of any additional regulation.” 43 Municipal Broadband Projects (Feb. 10, 2015) http://bit.ly/1Mmw89f “[T]he Federal Communications Commission [is headed] toward approving a net-neutrality plan that carries some serious collateral risks. It would be better if Congress finally did its job and agreed on a legislated plan that avoids more bureaucratic wrangling.” The Washington Post (Feb. 11, 2015) http://wapo.st/1zaz7s9 “The proposed regulations would stifle investment and unbridled innovation in one of the few burgeoning industries in the U.S. economy, and potentially open the Internet to worse regulation in the future.” The Detroit News (Feb. 13, 2015) http://bit.ly/171Xp07 “The Obama administration and its FCC have chosen a perilous moment to reverse decades of bipartisan agreement to limit Internet regulation. They can’t have it both ways. By creating an irreconcilable contradiction between America’s domestic and foreign policies, the cause of an open and freedom-enhancing global Internet will suffer.” Robert M. Mcdowell, former commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission, and Gordon M. Goldstein, managing director at the global technology investment firm Silver Lake Partners (Feb. 18, 2015) http://on.wsj.com/17PGajv “Americans were promised the most transparent administration in history. Now the FCC will have to pass the rules so we can find out what’s in them.” Las Vegas Review Journal (Feb. 12, 2015) http://bit.ly/1CkNdbs “Considering the legitimate questions that Pai and other critics have raised about its effects, the commission should break with tradition and release the proposed rule now, well before the vote on Feb. 26. That way the public can have an informed debate about what’s actually in the plan, instead of exchanging ideological broadsides about its origins and effects.” Jon Healey, The Los Angeles Times (Feb. 11, 2015) http://lat.ms/1J4El2B 3“The prod from Mr. Obama came after an unusual, secretive effort inside the White House, led by two aides who built a case for the principle known as ‘net neutrality’ through dozens of meetings . . . . Acting like a parallel version of the FCC itself, R. David Edelman and Tom Power listened as Etsy Inc., Kickstarter Inc., Yahoo Inc.’s Tumblr and other companies insisted that utility-like rules were needed to help small companies and entrepreneurs compete online.” Gautham Nagesh & Brody Mullins, The Wall Street Journal (Feb. 4, 2015) http://on.wsj.com/16FXTcH “Wheeler’s choice is not really his, though. The draconian changes he announced Feb. 4 reflect President Obama’s desire to see the Internet operated as a public utility under the ‘strongest possible rules’ enforced through the FCC. Wheeler had been pursuing a lighter-touch compromise regulatory scheme. That plan is now out the window.” The Arizona Republic (Feb. 17, 2015) http://azc.cc/1EiNGxm “Taking such a public stance is unusual for a president when an independent agency is formulating policy.” Steve Lohr, The New York Times (Feb. 10, 2015) http://nyti.ms/1uWrjxH “On Nov. 10, President Obama dropped a major statement on net neutrality—an unusual attempt by a president to influence a legally independent agency.” Brian Fung, The Washington Post (Feb. 5, 2015) http://wapo.st/1C1i8Mp