Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
404513171
label
Telecommunications - NII (National Information Infrastructure) [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
404513171
contentType
document
title
Telecommunications - NII (National Information Infrastructure) [2]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the Council of Economic Advisers (Clinton Administration)
Joseph Stiglitz's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
404513171
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
4739354-20190203F-Seg2-008-007-2024
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
785a41bbe0486e8c
ocrText
FOIA Number: 2019-0203-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin: Council of Economic Advisers
Series/Staff Member:
Joseph Stiglitz
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
9563
FolderID:
Folder Title:
Telecommunications - NII (National Information Infrastructure) [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
20
5
11
3
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001. minutes
re: NIITF meeting [partial] (2 pages)
01/25/1994
P3/b(3)
002. minutes
re: NIITF meeting [partial] (2 pages)
01/25/1994
P3/b(3)
003. minutes
re: NIITF meeting [partial] (1 page)
10/17/1993
P3/b(3)
004. minutes
re: NIITF meeting [partial] (1 page)
10/27/1993
P3/b(3)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Council of Economic Advisers
Stiglitz, Joseph
OA/Box Number: 9563
FOLDER TITLE:
Telecommuncations - NII (National Information Infrastructure) [2]
2019-0203-F
jm2837
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - |44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
OF COMMERCE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Information Administration
Washington, D.C. 20230
Date:
March 15, 1994
To:
All IITF Participants
From:
IITF Secretariat
FSiT
Subject: Upcoming NII Events
Detailed information concerning two upcoming NII events is
available below. All IITF participants are welcome to attend.
NII Advisory Council Meeting
March 18, 1994
As you may know, the National Information Infrastructure Advisory
Council (NIIAC) will hold its second meeting on Friday, March 18,
1994. The meeting will be held in the Thomas Jefferson Memorial
Auditorium, at the Department of Agriculture South Building, from
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The meeting will be open to the public and
all IITF participants are welcome to attend.
Attached is an agenda outlining the issues that the NIIAC will be
addressing at its second meeting. To register, please contact
Alison Andrews or Sarah Maloney at 202/482-1835 (office) or
202/482-0979 (fax).
Public Interest Summit
March 29, 1994
The Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF), with co-sponsors
the Benton Foundation, National Video Resources, the Rockefeller
Foundation, and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation,
would like to invite you to participate in a public interest
conference, "Shaping the National Information Infrastructure: The
Public Interest Summit." This event will be held on March 29,
1994, at the Hyatt Regency Hotel, 400 New Jersey Avenue, NW,
Washington, D.C.
Please join Vice President Gore, key Administration officials, and
public interest leaders at the Summit to discuss public interest
concerns in shaping the "information superhighway." For your
convenience, attached is a letter outlining specific areas that
will be addressed at the Public Interest Summit, as well as a
registration form to be returned by March 17 to reserve a seat. If
you have any questions, please contact Yvette Barrett at
202/482-1835 (office).
UNITED STATES ADVISORY COUNCIL ON
THE NATIONAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE
March 18, 1994
AGENDA
8:00 a.m.
Opening Remarks
Co-Chairs Delano Lewis and Ed McCracken
8:10 a.m
How Should the Advisory Council Define the NII?
Panel Discussion:
John Cooke, Moderator
Jane Smith Patterson
Mitchell Kapor
James Houghton
9:15 a.m.
15 minute break
9:30 a.m.
Mega-Project I: Access to the NII
Panel will propose scope for this Project:
Lynn Forrester
Craig Fields
Toni Carbo Bearman
10:45 a.m.
15 minute break
11:00 a.m.
Council Priorities
Co-Chairs will propose priorities and lead discussion
12:15 p.m.
15 minute break
12:30 p.m.
Luncheon Discussion: Council Administration and Logistics
Interaction with Government
Regional Meetings
E-Mail
Funding
Staffing
1:45 p.m.
15 minute break
2:00 p.m.
Public Comment, Questions and Answers
2:45 p.m.
15 minute break
3:00 p.m.
Discussion on Telecommunications Issues
4:45 p.m.
Closing Remarks and Adjournment
Co-Chairs Delano Lewis and Ed McCracken
SHAPING THE NATIONAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE:
THE PUBLIC INTEREST SUMMIT
Benton Foundation
1634 Eye Street, NW
March 29 - Washington, D.C.
Washington, DC 20006
Tel 202*638*5770
Fax 202-638-5771
Join Vice President Gore, key Administration officials and
Email: [email protected]
hundreds of public interest leaders to articulate a
public interest agenda for the "information superhighway."
Dear Colleague:
The information superhighway is being built today, but is it shaped by a public
interest vision? Who will make sure that the promised benefits in education, health
care, civic participation, and community development are backed up by public
policies? We urge you and your organization to be part of the answer. Join top
leaders of the public interest community for "Shaping the National Information
Infrastructure: The Public Interest Summit," on March 29 from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30
p.m. at the Hyatt Regency Hotel, 400 New Jersey Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C.
Throughout the day, Administration officials will appear with public interest
leaders in a substantive dialogue designed to elevate public interest issues to the top of
the communications policy agenda. Vice President Gore is scheduled to deliver the
keynote address on Administration programs to advance public interest goals.
Nonprofit leaders will address the social, economic, and political impacts of the NII:
Will the NII reach all of Americans, or will it leave some of us behind?
Who will have the access to be an information provider? Will it support a
nation of active speakers or a nation of passive consumers? How much will it
cost? What policies are needed to make it available and keep it within reach?
What types of education, health care and other services, applications and
programming do we want to see on the NII? How will we ensure that these
are delivered once the highway is built?
What will the NII mean for our communities and for economic
development? How do we make sure its benefits are widely shared?
Will the NII increase public access to government information and support
an informed, active populace? What are the NII's implications for core
democratic values: citizen participation, free speech, free assembly, and
privacy?
This meeting is not just for communications policy groups; it is for public
interest leaders from every sector who care about how we will educate our
Andrew Blau
Project Coordinator
Karen Menichelli
Associate Director
Larry Kirkman
Executive Director
communications policy project
children, revitalize our communities, and communicate our values in the 21st
century. You have a contribution to make to this dialogue and a stake in the outcome
of each of these issues. We hope to see you there.
The Public Interest Summit is co-sponsored by the Information Infrastructure
Task Force; Benton Foundation; The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur
Foundation; National Video Resources; and the Rockefeller Foundation. For more
information, contact Amy Mayers at the Benton Foundation: 202-638-5770, x32.
Sincerely,
Andrew Blau
Communications Policy Project
Benton Foundation
Chair, Program Committee
- Program Committee -
Prudence Adler
Gary Bass
Association of Research Libraries
OMB Watch
Jerry Berman
Jeffrey Chester
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Center for Media Education
Richard Civille
Robert Gillespie
Center for Civic Networking
Higher Education and
Libraries Consortium for
Information Policy
Janlori Goldman
T. Andrew Lewis
Privacy and Technology Project
Alliance for Community Media
American Civil Liberties Union
Patrice McDermott
Paul Schroeder
OMB Watch
American Council of the Blind
Bradley Stillman
Consumer Federation of America
Register now
Attendance at this important event is limited and we expect it to
be over-subscribed. Therefore, we reserve the right to limit the
number of registrants from any one organization. We are re-
questing a $25 registration fee. Please check the box on the
registration form if the fee would be an impediment to attending
and we will contact you.
To reserve a place at the Summit, fax the registration form
on the back of this page (no cover page needed) to 1-800/947-
7904 by March 15. To confirm your registration, we must re-
ceive your $25 payment (checks only) by March 22, made
payable to "Benton Foundation." Please indicate on the check
that it is for the Summit.
If you are coming from out of town, the Hyatt Regency is
holding a limited number of rooms for Summit participants until
March 15. You can make a reservation by calling the Hyatt at
202/737-1234. Ask for Reservations and tell them you are
coming to the Public Interest Summit. The special Summit rate is
$132 plus sales and occupancy tax for a single or double. If you
need a referral to other hotels with a range of rates, check the
box on the Summit registration form.
We will have display tables at the Summit and invite you to
bring your organization's materials to share with other partici-
pants. If you will be bringing materials, please indicate this on
your faxback form so we can arrange for enough space.
If you need any more information, please call Amy Mayers,
at 202/638-5770, x32. We look forward to seeing you on
March 29.
SHAPING THE NATIONAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE:
THE PUBLIC INTEREST SUMMIT
REGISTRATION FORM
Please reserve your space by faxing back this registration form (no
cover sheet necessary) to 1-800/947-7904 by MARCH 15. To confirm
your registration, send your $25 check made payable to the Benton
Foundation by MARCH 22nd to: The Benton Foundation, 1634 Eye
Street NW, 12th Floor, Washington, DC 20006.
Please print/type clearly so your information will be accurate on your
nametag and for follow-up materials.)
Name
Title
Organization
Address
Ph
Email
Fax
I will be bringing materials to distribute.
I will need a sign language interpreter.
I will need a kosher lunch for Passover.
I will need a vegetarian lunch.
I will need information on other hotels.
Please call me.
Do you have any other special needs? Please specify:
The $25 is an impediment to my attending.
Please call me.
CONFERENCE SUMMARY
E-MEDIA 94: Improving the Process Used by the Federal Agencies to
Make Information Available to the Public
WASHINGTON, DC -- Despite inclement weather, the second E-MEDIA
Conference, held on January 21 at the Department of Commerce,
attracted over 100 attendees. Participants were trained in using
electronic media to disseminate Federal information. Sponsored
jointly by the Federal Government's Information Infrastructure Task
Force (IITF) and Americans Communicating Electronically (ACE), E-
MEDIA 94 included presentations on i) the administration's policies
regarding the dissemination of information to the public; and ii)
specific experience already gained by a number of Federal agencies
in using state-of-the-art electronic facilities for implementing
these policies. A third Conference, E-Media 94.1, has been
scheduled for April 4, 1994, at the Department of Commerce
Auditorium.
Bruce McConnell, of the Office of Management and Budget presenting
the administration's policy perspective, emphasized that existing
Federal information resource management policies are being reviewed
and specific directives defining revised policies are being
developed. As stated by Mr. McConnell, the Administration's
objective is to ensure that the public has timely and effective
access to significant portions of the immense reservoir of
information that Federal agencies develop while performing their
mandated missions. Mr. McConnell indicated that OMB Circular
A-130, published in the Federal Register on July 2, 1993, presents
the administration's latest directives regarding the dissemination
of information to the public. Section (3) and (8) present the
conditions under which Federal agencies shall use electronic media
for collecting and disseminating information. Mr. McConnell also
emphasized that Section (8) of OMB Circular A-130 directs the
Federal agencies to use public networks such as the Internet when
analyses indicate that this approach is practical and cost-
effective for both the Federal Government and that portion of the
public seeking or providing given information.
Paul Evan Peters, Executive Director of the Coalition for Networked
Information, presenting a public sector perspective, emphasized the
importance of communications in maintaining our cultural values.
He summarized the often stated conclusions that i) dominant
governments thrive on poor communications; ii) democracies thrive
on good communications; and iii) healthy and competitive economic
systems require excellent communications. Mr. Peters stressed that
urgent work is required at the local level to assure success in
establishing the "National Information Infrastructure". Individual
users will need to define the nature and scope of services they
want to receive from an aggregate of interoperable U.S. and global
information resources. Mr. Peters suggested that designers of the
information superhighway adopt the slogan "It's the Network,
Stupid".
Nancy Tosta, Staff Director for the Federal Geographic Data
Committee (FGDC) of the USGS presenting a Federal agency
perspective, emphasized that the implementation of the
administration's National Information Infrastructure initiatives
are expected to provide significant opportunities for promoting the
objectives of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure program.
Analyses by Earth Scientists of geographic variables require the
integration of information from physically dispersed databases
containing immense volumes of data. Making this information
available to analysts, within and outside the Federal Government,
in a timely and cost-effective manner appears to be feasible with
current digital network technology. However, there remain
significant challenges in implementing this technology such that
the objectives of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure program
can be satisfied.
Eliot Christian of the U.S. Geological Survey and William Moen of
Syracuse University summarized the development of the proposed
Government Information Locator Service (GILS). GILS is envisioned
as an integral part of the administration's NII initiatives, and is
intended to assist the public in identifying sources for Federal
Government information. Essential elements of GILS, as proposed,
include i) adopting, for use throughout the Federal Government, the
American National Standard Institute's (ANSI) information search
and retrieval standard known as "Z39.50"; and ii) retaining within
the agencies the responsibilities for maintaining decentralized
databases of information generated in that agency's mission
activities. Directives to the Federal agencies for implementing
GILS are expected to be provided through a future OMB bulletin.
Don Johnson, Director of the National Technical Information Service
in the Department of Commerce, summarized electronic bulletin board
experience and future plans in operating FedWorld. After 15 months
of operation, the FedWorld now receives about 6,000 calls a day.
While initially the service offered by FedWorld was limited to
providing a "gateway" (by directing callers) to about 150 other
Federal Government bulletin boards in the DC area, this gateway
service now comprises only about 25% of FedWorld's overall
services. FedWorld now offers services (also accessible over the
Internet) that include an "on-line market place" for collected
Federal Government documents, search service support to the
Depository Libraries, and fee-for-service electronic document
library support to Federal agencies. A major upgrade in the
FedWorld facilities is planned which will permit receiving up to
200 calls simultaneously and up to 10,000 calls per day.
Ken Rogers, Acting Director of the Office of Business Analysis in
the Department of Commerce, summarized electronic bulletin board
experience and future plans in operating the Economic Bulletin
Board®. This bulletin board is operated on a "fee-for-service"
basis (also accessible over the Internet) and has been operating
since 1985. Mr. Rogers stated that development had been initiated
on a "business and economic node for the information superhighway".
While portions of this node are still being defined, this node is
intended to be a source for a wide range of information that will
assist U.S. industry i) in achieving increased competitiveness, ii)
in increasing participation in international markets; and iii) in
developing new markets within and outside the U.S.
Judy Russell, Director of the Office of Electronic Information
Dissemination Services (EIDS) in the Government Printing Office,
summarized GPO's efforts to satisfy recent legislative directives
to disseminate Federal Government documents in electronic form.
The legislation requires the establishment of both a "locator
system" and an "electronic storage system". Extensive contract
work is underway on the development of these systems and
announcements regarding prototype testing will be made in the near
future.
The Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF), Chaired by
Secretary Brown of the Department of Commerce, is responsible for
implementing the National Information Infrastructure (NII). The
IITF is addressing a wide range of issues and has established a
number of committees and working groups; the dissemination of
Federal Government information is being addressed by the Government
Information Working Group (GIWG), chaired by Mr. Bruce McConnell of
OMB. During mid-1993, the GIWG identified an urgent need to
establish a public forum to address a wide range of issues
regarding the administration's existing policies and the Federal
agencies' recently gained experience regarding the implementation
of state-of-the-art technology for exchanging information in
electronic form with the public. To satisfy this need, the GIWG
convened E-MEDIA 93 in November 1993 at the U.S. Geological Survey.
The success of E-MEDIA 93 confirmed the continuing need for a forum
of this type; therefore, planning was quickly initiated for E-MEDIA
94 under the co-sponsorship of the GIWG and Americans Communicating
Electronically (ACE).
ACE is a program established in June 1993 by the Communication
Information and Technology staff within the Agriculture Research
and Education Service (ARES) of the Department of Agriculture. The
objective of the ACE Program is to promote enhanced interactive
citizen-government communications. ACE is actively seeking
individual participation by both Federal Government employees and
members of the public. Further information regarding ACE can be
obtained by contacting Tom Tate (Internet E-Mail:[email protected]
or phone: 202 720 8155).
Mr. Irving thanks all the speakers at E-MEDIA 94 for making the
conference possible. Special thanks are also extended by Mr.
Irving to Eliot Christian and the members of his planning committee
for organizing E-MEDIA 94.
Government-Internal
THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S
INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE TASK FORCE MEETING
Chair: Ronald H. Brown, Secretary of Commerce
Government-Internal Minutes of January 25, 1994, Meeting
TIME AND PLACE: 10:00 a.m., Vice President's Ceremonial Office, Old Executive Office
Building.
PURPOSE: To review the current and planned activities regarding the promotion of the National
Information Infrastructure ("NII").
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING
OPENING REMARKS
Secretary Brown called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone to the second meeting of the
Information Infrastructure Task Force ("IITF"). He noted that at the moment Vice President Gore
was involved with preparations for President Clinton's State of the Union address and, therefore,
would not be present for most, and perhaps all, of this meeting. Secretary Brown asked that
everyone in the room identify himself or herself.
IITF OVERVIEW
Secretary Brown noted that a great number of agencies are represented in the IITF and that it
provides an excellent example of interagency coordination. Realizing the full potential of the NII
requires work on a number of fronts simultaneously. He said that the Vice President would be very
pleased that so many persons have taken the time to become involved in this initiative. The IITF
members are able to share their views and visions for the future. Secretary Brown stated that the
IITF members have built a solid foundation even though this is only the IITF's second meeting.
Secretary Brown reported that there will be a lot of action on Capitol Hill with respect to the NII. He
said that the Administration wants to work closely with the Hill. He informed the IITF that he had
dinner with Senator Hollings and Representative Dingell last night. They told him that they want to
be significant players in the NII.
Secretary Brown delineated some of the goals of the NII. The Administration wants to facilitate
economic growth by removing unnecessary regulatory barriers. The Administration seeks to provide
real economic opportunity not only in the telecommunications sector, but also in all sectors of the
U.S. economy. The NII will make all industries more productive and, therefore, more competitive
both at home and abroad. The NII could be a new jobs program for the United States. It also will
promote advances in education, health care, and information access. Secretary Brown emphasized the
importance of universal access, in order to avoid a society of information haves and have nots.
Americans should have access to information regardless of geography, income, or other impediments.
Our goal should be the maximum dissemination of information. He noted that the Vice President
stated in his January 11 speech that universal access is a principal goal. In that speech, the Vice
President challenged private industry to link social institutions -- classrooms, libraries, hospitals, and
clinics -- to the information highway by the year 2000.
Secretary Brown stated that a number of important events will take place this week. President
Clinton will deliver his State of the Union address this evening. Assistant Attorney General Anne
Bingaman and Assistant Secretary Larry Irving will testify regarding NII legislation on the Hill on
Wednesday and Thursday. On Thursday, the Administration will release its White Paper setting forth
its legislative proposals.
The Secretary also noted that there is a lot of work to do outside the Beltway. There is a growing
public awareness of and interest in the NII. The press has written and spoken a great deal about the
information superhighway.
Secretary Brown also announced the appointment of the NII Advisory Council. He noted that the
Advisory Council has 27 members who reflect a wide range of interests. There are still a couple of
groups who believe that they are not represented, and there is a possibility for one or two more
members. He said that the IITF now needs to chart a course for the Advisory Council and make sure
that the members' concerns and views become part of the process.
IITF COMMITTEE REPORTS
Telecommunications Policy Committee
Larry Irving, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information and Chair of the
Telecommunications Policy Committee, gave the first report. He began by noting that many of the
members of the Telecommunications Policy Committee are actively involved in the NII's legislative
effort. He stated that the legislative initiative has been led by Vice President Gore and Secretary
Brown. The Administration's legislative proposals are based on the following five principles that the
Vice President and Secretary Brown set forth in speeches earlier this month: (1) encouraging private
investment in the NII; (2) promoting and protecting competition; (3) providing open access to the NII
by consumers and service providers; (4) preserving and advancing universal service to avoid creating
a society of information "haves" and "have nots;" and (5) ensuring flexibility so that the newly-
adopted regulatory framework can keep pace with the rapid technological and market changes that
pervade the telecommunications and information industries. He noted that the Administration shares
the belief of many in Congress that legislative reform of telecommunications policy is essential to
meeting these goals.
Mr. Irving then summarized the major areas of the Administration's proposed legislative reform.
First, proposals focus on local competition and interconnection. The Administration supports the
general requirement that all carriers must interconnect with other providers of telecommunications and
information services. Such a requirement helps ensure that the NII functions seamlessly. The
Administration hopes that all providers will be able to provide any service to any user in the United
States. He said that the Administration also supports imposing more specific procompetitive
interconnection requirements on local exchange carriers, such as an obligation to interconnect at any
technically feasible and economically reasonable point and an obligation to afford nondiscriminatory
access to network facilities, services, functions, and information, where technically feasible and
economically reasonable. The goal here is to break open the local loop bottlenecks.
2
Mr. Irving stated that a second area of reform concerns relations with the States. Because a national
framework will promote maximum competition, the Administration proposes to preempt state entry
regulation for provision of telecommunications and information services. The Administration also
proposes to preempt state and local regulation of the rates for any service charged by a
telecommunications carrier that the FCC finds, after notice and comment, to lack market power. He
noted that the Administration will be working closely with the States on these and other issues. For
instance, he will be participating in a conference call next week with NARUC.
A third area of reform will emphasize regulatory flexibility. An Administration priority is to make
government work better for the American people by reducing red tape and eliminating regulatory
overkill. The Administration wants to promote entrepreneurship and competition, and believes that
forbearance can further these goals. Thus, the Administration proposes to authorize the FCC (1) to
exempt carriers lacking market power from Title II of the Communications Act, except provisions
relating to the duty to serve and interconnect; the duty to charge just, reasonable, and
nondiscriminatory rates; damages; and customer complaints; and (2) to tailor the regulations it does
impose to reflect a carrier's market power.
A fourth area of proposed legislative reform is universal service. The Administration supports efforts
to make the preservation and advancement of universal service an explicit objective of the
Communications Act. Mr. Irving noted that the United States currently has approximately 94 percent
of households connected to the telephone system, although the rates are lower in certain areas of the
country, such as Washington, D.C. and New Mexico. We want to preserve and improve such access.
Moreover, as the Vice President stated in his speech on January 11, the Administration believes that
advanced services should be available to rural and urban lower income users, to users in areas where
the cost of service are high, and to social institutions, especially educational and health care facilities.
The Administration supports charging the FCC and the states with continuing responsibility to review
and revise objectives for expanding universal service to meet changing circumstances. The
Administration is not suggesting any particular uniform universal service obligation to be dictated by
Washington. Rather, we need to work with the States and allow each state flexibility depending on its
needs.
Another key area of reform involves the cable-telephone cross-ownership restriction. Mr. Irving
noted that although the existing cable-telephone company cross-ownership restriction of the 1984
Cable Act may have been appropriate when enacted, today it is an unnecessary and artificial barrier to
competition in the delivery of video programming to American consumers and to investment in
advanced local infrastructure. The Administration proposes to remove the current restriction. This
action, coupled with its proposals to promote competition in local telephone service, will allow
telephone companies and cable operators to compete in providing a full range of video, voice, and
data services to the public. It will hasten the construction of the NII. Mr. Irving stated that we are
not talking about one versus two wires into the home. The issue is robust competition. He noted that
the wireless services also will be providing competition. He noted that to ensure that cable firms and
telephone companies do not harm consumers or competition in providing these services, the
Administration proposes safeguards, such as structural safeguards, nondiscriminatory access
obligations, anti-buyout provisions, and franchise obligations. The Administration feels very strongly
about the anti-buyout provisions. Under the current Congressional bills, TCI/Bell Atlantic would be
able to keep all of Washington and Pittsburgh. The Administration believes that this situation should
not occur.
3
Finally, the Administration will put forth the proposal for a new Title VII to regulate two-way,
broadband transmission services. Mr. Irving explained that providers of such services now have their
telephony regulated by Title II and their cable regulated by Title VI. The Administration believes that
such services should be subject to less regulation and therefore conceived of a new Title VII, which
will also encourage development of these services.
Mr. Irving announced that he, together with Assistant Attorney General Anne Bingaman, will testify
on January 26 before the House Economic and Commercial Law Subcommittee (Chairman Brooks) on
H.R. 3626 (the "MFJ bill") and on January 27 before the House Telecommunications and Finance
Subcommittee on H.R. 3636 (the "local competition bill") and H.R. 3626.
Mr. Irving commended those persons who worked on the legislative proposals. The Office of the
Vice President, Justice, OMB, OSTP, NEC, DOC, and the FCC (as observers) were all valuable
contributors. He said that it was incredible that there were no leaks regarding the substance of the
legislative proposals. He stated that Anne Bingaman has been a central figure in the formulation of
the legislative proposals, and that he looks forward to testifying with her tomorrow.
Mr. Irving stated that the legislative efforts were only part of the work of the Telecommunications
Policy Committee. The Committee has been busy with a number of other projects as well. On
November 19, 1993, NTIA hosted an Agenda Planning Conference for regulators at the Annenberg
Washington Program. Federal, state, and local regulators engaged in policy debate on NII issues.
NTIA worked closely with the States on this project, and will continue such efforts. Members of the
Committee assisted in planning this effort and participated on panels. We plan to have several similar
meetings over the next six months.
The Committee will work with NTIA to publish a collection of papers entitled 20/20 Vision in
February/March. 20/20 Vision is a collection of telecommunications and information technology
experts' responses to the National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action.
The Committee will sponsor two panels on universal service and open access issues as part of the
IITF's Public Interest Forum in February/March. The Committee also will work with NTIA to
publish a Notice of Inquiry on network access issues.
The Telecommunications Policy Committee has two working groups: (1) the Universal Service
Working Group, and (2) the International Telecommunications Policy Working Group. The Universal
Service Working Group has had two meetings -- November 29 and January 10. The working group
has been assisting on issues related to NTIA's series of universal service field hearings. The first
field hearing on universal service took place on December 16 in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The
focus of this hearing was to look at provision of services in a high-cost area. Congressman Bingaman
and DOC Deputy Secretary Barram participated in the hearing. More than 50 witnesses and people
from the public provided testimony. A second hearing was scheduled in South Central Los Angeles
on January 19, but was postponed due to the earthquake. The large number of languages spoken in
the L.A. area poses unique questions with respect to universal service requirements.
Mr. Irving noted that the International Telecommunications Policy Working Group, chaired by Carol
Darr, also has been active. This working group has generated a comprehensive outline of
international issues affecting the development of a global information infrastructure. It also has
formed five subgroups, each of which will undertake activities related to the following issues: (1)
4
foreign government/foreign corporation participation in the NII and the use of the NII to open
overseas markets; (2) the effect of current law on setting policy and legislative efforts to change the
law; (3) U.S. government control of the flow of technology transfers; (4) U.S. participation in
international organizations and standards setting bodies; and (5) the international use of research
networks. The working group has identified two cross-cutting issues, international protection of
intellectual property rights and privacy, which require coordination across the IITF's Committees.
Mr. Irving stated that this spring the Committee will establish a Network Reliability Working Group
that will work with the private sector to reduce the vulnerability of the nation's information
infrastructure and ensure that it is designed and managed in a way that minimizes the impact of
accident or sabotage.
The Telecommunications Policy Committee will publish a six-month progress report on the status of
its NII activities.
Finally, the Committee will establish an outreach program for public, industry, and public interest
involvement in Committee activities by June.
Mr. Irving concluded his report by stating that the Administration hopes for success on the legislative
front, and that it will be working closely with Congress over the next few months. He said that the
alignment of the stars looks favorable. He welcomes interest and participation by members of the
IITF. He stated that many other important issues await debate and resolution, such as broadcast and
mass media issues, encouraging new entrants, and facilitating handicapped access to the information
infrastructure. Many issues may need to be addressed by regulatory reforms, rather than legislation.
The Committee hopes to work closely with the NII Advisory Council, which will hold its first
meeting on February 10. It will be an opportunity to make the private-public partnership work.
There were no questions for Mr. Irving, but there was some general discussion about the NII.
Secretary of Education Riley spoke about the Department of Education's interest in the NII and the
new information technologies. The Department's goal is to provide world-class education for all
students in the United States. Secretary Riley noted that the use of technology is critical to this
effort. The Secretary has seen examples of what can be done. He was recently in Iowa and Georgia,
participating in some NII-related exercises. He said that interesting discussions are taking place in
Los Angeles regarding distance-learning efforts during crises. He also noted that the Annenberg gift
can be directed to supporting some of these initiatives.
Secretary Brown stated that there are few areas where we can have a more positive impact than in the
educational realm. He said that the Vice President shares this view.
Secretary Brown noted that a key issue that all of the IITF Committees are facing is security. On the
telecommunications side, a reliable network is essential for the NII to function. On the information
side, protection of individual privacy and intellectual property requires strong, easy-to-use security
technologies. Both of these kinds of applications mean new technologies are needed. To promote
coordination and cross-fertilization on security issues, Sally Katzen will soon be hosting a general
meeting on the subject of NII security, to be held in February.
5
Committee on Applications and Technology
Arati Prabhakar, Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology and Chair of the
Committee on Applications and Technology, gave her report. First, she noted that the Committee
addresses work that the government does and how the government participates in technology
development. She then handed out a chart that shows the agencies participating in the Committee and
the Committee's two working groups -- (1) the Government Information Technology Services
Working Group; and (2) the Technology Policy Working Group. Jim Flyzik chairs the Government
Information Technology Services Working Group. The group is working on formulating a strategic
vision and an implementation plan for using government information resources across and within
government agencies. The group also is initiating interagency teams to work on specific projects.
The Technology Policy Working Group is chaired by Duane Adams. This group was created to ask
the tough technology questions about how we can create interoperable and scalable technologies. The
group will address the issue of how to lay out the technology road maps. The need for a public-
private dialogue is crucial here. This group will be co-sponsoring with industry groups a conference
on the NII at the end of February.
Dr. Prabhakar stated that the High Performance Computing, Communications and Information
Technology Subcommittee is coordinating the government's information technology programs. This
is a critical piece of the NII effort. She noted that the Technology Policy Working Group and the full
committee work closely with the Subcommittee.
Dr. Prabhakar then summarized the activities of the Committee on Applications and Technology. She
noted that while it is impossible to get one's arms around all of the NII efforts taking place in the
government, the Committee is compiling a list of current applications in each agency and the nature
of the application (e.g., government services, education). Tab E, section 5, of the briefing book for
today's meeting contains a list of agencies that have contributed to the Committee's inventory. The
Department of Agriculture should be added to that list. The Committee has put this information on-
line. This will provide easy reference for when a person asks, for example, what the government is
doing with respect to applications of technology to education.
The Committee also has provided a brief and thoughtful look at NII issues that cut across applications
areas. The Committee looked at the following application areas: health care, environmental
monitoring, manufacturing, electronic commerce and telecommuting, government services, education,
and libraries. The important cross-cutting issues that emerged are: providing equitable access, user
acceptance, privacy, user training, organizational learning, private-sector acceptance of government
technology, intellectual property rights, information security, information access, information and data
standards, conversion of information, user-friendly hardware and software, interoperability standards,
scalability, cost and pricing, and public funding.
The Committee's current project is the development of a group of NII strategies. It will begin by
focusing on the application areas listed above. The Committee will provide a snapshot of where we
are today and a road map for how we get to where we want to be. It will explore potential legislative
issues and ways to interact with the private sector. The Committee expects to have a draft in mid-
February. It would like to get the IITF's approval of these strategies in April.
6
The Committee is working with the Council on Competitiveness to enable the IITF to co-host an
applications conference this summer. The conference will explore the barriers and issues involved in
implementing applications.
Dr. Prabhakar expressed pleasure with the interagency effort within the Committee.
It was noted that the Committee's report defines key terms, and it was suggested that it might be
valuable to have a consistent set of terms for the IITF.
Secretary Brown put forth the question of how can we promote government use of e-mail. Dr.
Prabhakar stated that an e-mail task force has been established. Deputy Secretary Barram also
suggested that a way to motivate people to use e-mail would be for the Vice President, Secretary
Brown, and other senior persons to be active users.
It was noted that many commercial services may be affordable by the government and should be
explored.
Information Policy Committee
Sally Katzen, Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, and Chair of the Information Policy Committee, reported on the
Committee's activities. She began by noting her deep appreciation of the contributions by staff of
numerous agencies.
The Committee has three working groups: (1) Privacy Working Group; (2) Intellectual Property
Working Group; and (3) Government Information Working Group. The Privacy Working Group is
putting together a statement of principles on the use and abuse of information -- "The Code of Fair
Information Practices." The group has met with 30 experts to discuss potential modifications. The
group has reached some tentative conclusions. With respect to the definition of privacy, the group is
using the term to encompass data usage, not data protection. One needs to look at the interests of
both record subjects and record holders. Record subjects cannot be passive. They need to take more
responsibility. Collectors and users of data need to exercise more responsibility as well. The group
should have a final product by mid-February.
The Government Information Working Group is developing the Government Information Locator
Service ("GILS"). GILS would help the public locate and access information throughout the federal
government. It would identify public information resources throughout the government agencies,
describe the information available in those resources, and assist in obtaining the information. GILS
would supplement, not supplant, other information sources. The group hopes that GILS could be
accessed directly through 800 numbers, kiosks, electronic mail, bulletin boards, fax, and off-line
media such as CD-ROM and floppy disks. The public also could be served by GILS indirectly
through central disseminating agencies such as the Government Printing Office ("GPO"). GPO could
have a major role in providing training to facilitate dissemination through interagency arrangements.
The group has released its draft report on GILS. It would like to receive comments by February 25.
The Government Information Working Group has held two workshops on how to disseminate
government information. Several hundred people attended the workshops. It will host a third
workshop in April.
7
The Intellectual Property Working Group held a public hearing in November to hear testimony
regarding preserving intellectual property rights in the electronic age. The group will issue a report
by April 15.
ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE CHARTERS AND WORK PLANS
Secretary Brown moved for the adoption of the charters and work plans of the various committees.
The motion passed unanimously.
NII ADVISORY COUNCIL AND OUTREACH DISCUSSION
Secretary Brown stated that the NII Advisory Council is an extremely important asset. Its members
have a lot of talent and expertise. The members are listed under Tab C of the briefing book for
today's meeting. The Advisory Council can have valuable input on the question of the role of
government in the NII and on questions concerning privacy. The Advisory Council can help define
for us when an application becomes a public service and perhaps should receive a subsidy. NTIA is
exploring how to have all members of the Advisory Council connected by electronic mail.
DEPARTMENT/AGENCY REPORTS ON ACTIVITIES TO PROMOTE THE NII
Department of Energy
The five priority Department of Energy infrastructure applications are: (1) environmental restoration
and waste minimization; (2) manufacturing; (3) education, focused at the pre-college level and on
involving more women and minorities in science; (4) easy and affordable access to digital libraries;
and (5) energy demand and supply management -- the ability of the consumer and the power
companies to interactively determine usage patterns (especially important given the power crisis in
D.C. last Thursday). DOE is at the planning and discussion stage for many of these applications.
DOE is the custodian of much environmental restoration data. The Department is talking with EPA,
DOC, and the States with respect to making this information available to the public.
DOE is working on interactive video over Internet. DOE has used the Internet in exercises with K-12
children in Tennessee, Iowa, and New Mexico. The Department also is developing an electronic
textbook using Mosaic, and the architecture can be extended to a number of other educational
applications.
NASA
NASA's contributions to the creation of a NII include: (1) applications of remote sensing data; (2)
education, training, and lifelong learning; and (3) health care and telemedicine; and (4) development
of digital libraries. NASA is trying to put more novel applications on the Internet. Through NASA
teacher resource centers, the agency is reaching out to communities to disseminate information over
the Internet for K-12 grades. Following his January 11 speech in Los Angeles, the Vice President
visited one of the schools that NASA is working with in Silicon Valley and saw how the students are
using Internet. NASA is working with DOE, NSF, and the Department of Education.
8
NASA also is working with the U.S. Postal Service, the IRS, and EPA to develop certification and
authentification applications. In the area of health care, NASA has been involved in using satellites to
provide remote medical assistance.
The NII will be used to "reinvent" NASA and improve its ability to operate effectively. NASA hopes
to institute electronic contracting and solicitation. It seeks to use Internet to let the public direct
questions to NASA scientists. One of the novel uses of Internet by NASA was the broadcast of the
most recent space mission on Internet.
EPA
EPA is currently putting environmental data bases on Internet. It is providing business with
information on pollution-prevention practices and technology. EPA is also working with EPA's state
partners so that they will have e-mail access to EPA and EPA will facilitate access to Internet. This
will enable EPA to give state environmental agencies access to information and geographic data. The
entire agency will be on e-mail by the end of March. EPA is developing its own software tool known
as "Gateway," which will provide agency, other federal, and state databases to EPA users at the
desktop.
The Intelligence Community
The Intelligence Community agencies depend greatly on access to information. NSA is concerned
with communications security and threats to the U.S. NII. The Intelligence Systems Board is
currently instituting e-mail throughout the Intelligence Community agencies and dealing with security
issues. The Intelligence Community will increasingly interact with persons outside the Intelligence
Community -- those in academia, industry, and other government agencies. It also will increase
outreach efforts to former employees.
HUD
HUD is committed to improving access to information, especially information about the Community
Reinvestment Act and the Homeowners Disclosure Act regarding mortgages. Community groups and
lenders can benefit from such information. HUD also is working on putting information about small
businesses on line.
Department of Agriculture
The Department of Agriculture has been involved in programs promoting distance learning to rural
areas and loans to rural telephone companies for constructing digital switches. Over the past forty
years, the Department has furnished loans and loan guarantees through the Rural Electrification
Administration. DOA recognizes the importance of universal access.
ADJOURNMENT
Secretary Brown stated that he was greatly encouraged by the number of creative ideas. The
presentations reveal a very good beginning. However, we can and must do more as effective
advocates of the NII. He noted that there is a lot of talent in the IITF and on the NII Advisory
9
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001. minutes
re: NIITF meeting [partial] (2 pages)
01/25/1994
P3/b(3)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Council of Economic Advisers
Stiglitz, Joseph
OA/Box Number: 9563
FOLDER TITLE:
Telecommuncations - NII (National Information Infrastructure) [2]
2019-0203-F
jm2837
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
Council and we will call on it as we go forward. Secretary Brown thanked everyone and adjourned
the meeting at 12:00 p.m.
ATTENDEES:
Secretary Ronald H. Brown, DOC
Secretary Richard Riley, ED
Kathy Aterno, EPA
Duane Adams, DOD/ARPA
D. James Baker, DOC
David Barram, DOC
Lawrence E. Barrett, SBA
Yvette Barrett, DOC/NTIA
James H. Billington, Library of Congress
Christopher Bullock, EPA
Melvyn Ciment, NSF
Stephen R. Colgate, DOJ
Roger M. Cooper, DOJ
(b)(3)
[ 001]
Carol C. Darr, DOC
Brad Delong, Treasury
Michele Farquhar, DOC/NTIA
Randy Feuerstein, Interior
James J. Flyzik, Treasury
Dirk Forrister, DOE
Howard Frank, DOC/APPA
Cita Furlani, DOC/NIST
Jock Gill, EOP/Media Affairs
John Gilsenan, State
Administrator Daniel S. Goldin, NASA
Adam M. Golodner, Agriculture
Jim Gray, TVA
Jane Bortnick Griffith, Library of Congress
John Grimes, DOD
Dan Grulke, DOD
Keith D. Hahn, NSC
Janet Handal, DOD/ARPA
Lee B. Holcomb, NASA
Larry Irving, DOC/NTIA
Administrator Roger Johnson, GSA
Anita K. Jones, DOD
Tom Kalil, NEC
Charles Kalina, HPCC/OSTP
Sally Katzen, OMB
Maureen Kennedy, HUD
Deborah Knopman, Interior
Madeline Kunin, ED
10
Kelly Levy, DOC/NTIA
Blair Levin, FCC
Robert E. Litan, DOJ
David Lytel, DOC/NIST
Sarah Maloney, DOC/NTIA
Mark N. Mandell, DOC/NIST
Vonya B. McCann, State
Bruce McConnell, OMB
Denise Michel, DOC
Alicia Munnell, Treasury
Edward Murphy, Treasury
David Nelson, DOE
Michael Nelson, OSTP
Robert Pepper, FCC
Robert Peters, Agriculture
Terry Peterson, ED
Robert Portman, Labor
Arati Prabhakar, DOC/NIST
Robert Reisner, U.S. Postal Service
Kathleen Roberts, DOC/NIST
Linda Roberts, ED
Jon Seymour, DOT
(b)(3)
Joe Stiglitz, CEA
Neil J. Stillman, DHHS
Jay Stowsky, CEA
Thomas J. Sugrue, DOC/NTIA
Eugene K. Taylor, DOT
Jim Vollman, Labor
William M. Webster, ED
Tatia Williams, DOC/NTIA
11
Public
THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S
INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE TASK FORCE MEETING
Chair: Ronald H. Brown, Secretary of Commerce
Public Minutes of January 25, 1994, Meeting
TIME AND PLACE: 10:00 a.m., Vice President's Ceremonial Office, Old Executive Office
Building.
PURPOSE: To review the current and planned activities regarding the promotion of the National
Information Infrastructure ("NII").
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING
OPENING REMARKS
Secretary Brown called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone to the second meeting of the
Information Infrastructure Task Force ("IITF"). He noted that at the moment Vice President Gore
was involved with preparations for President Clinton's State of the Union address and, therefore,
would not be present for most, and perhaps all, of this meeting. Secretary Brown asked that
everyone in the room identify himself or herself. He noted that a great number of agencies are
represented in the IITF and that it provides an excellent example of interagency coordination.
IITF OVERVIEW
Secretary Brown reported that there will be a lot of action on Capitol Hill with respect to the NII. He
said that the Administration wants to work closely with the Hill.
Secretary Brown delineated some of the goals of the NII. The Administration wants to facilitate
economic growth by removing unnecessary regulatory barriers. The NII also will promote advances
in education, health care, and information access. Secretary Brown emphasized the importance of
universal access, in order to avoid a society of information haves and have nots. Americans should
have access to information regardless of geography, income, or other impediments. He noted that the
Vice President stated in his January 11 speech that universal access is a principal goal. In that
speech, the Vice President challenged private industry to link social institutions -- classrooms,
libraries, hospitals, and clinics -- to the information highway by the year 2000.
Secretary Brown stated that a number of important events will take place this week. President
Clinton will deliver his State of the Union address this evening. Assistant Attorney General Anne
Bingaman and Assistant Secretary Larry Irving will testify regarding NII legislation on the Hill. On
Thursday, the Administration will release its White Paper setting forth its legislative proposals.
The Secretary stated that there is a lot of work to do outside the Beltway. There is a growing public
awareness of and interest in the NII.
Secretary Brown noted the appointment of the NII Advisory Council. The Advisory Council has 27
members who reflect a wide range of interests. The IITF now needs to chart a course for the
Advisory Council and make sure that the members' concerns and views become part of the process.
IITF COMMITTEE REPORTS
Telecommunications Policy Committee
Larry Irving, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information and Chair of the
Telecommunications Policy Committee, gave the first report. He began by noting that many of the
members of the Telecommunications Policy Committee are actively involved in the NII's legislative
effort. The legislative initiative has been led by Vice President Gore and Secretary Brown. The
Administration's legislative proposals are based on the principles that the Vice President and Secretary
Brown set forth in speeches earlier this month: (1) encouraging private investment in the NII; (2)
promoting competition; (3) providing open access to the NII; (4) preserving and advancing universal
service; and (5) ensuring flexibility so that the newly-adopted regulatory framework can keep pace
with the rapid technological and market changes.
Mr. Irving then summarized the major areas of the Administration's proposed legislative reform.
First, proposals focus on local competition and interconnection. The Administration supports the
general requirement that all carriers must interconnect with other providers of telecommunications and
information services. Such a requirement helps ensure that the NII functions seamlessly. Second, the
Administration proposes to preempt state entry regulation for provision of telecommunications and
information services. The Administration also proposes to preempt state and local regulation of the
rates for any service charged by a telecommunications carrier that the FCC finds to lack market
power. A third area of reform will emphasize regulatory flexibility. The Administration wants to
promote entrepreneurship and competition, and believes that forbearance can further these goals. A
fourth area of proposed legislative reform is universal service. The Administration supports efforts to
make the preservation and advancement of universal service an explicit objective of the
Communications Act.
Another key area of reform involves the cable-telephone cross-ownership restriction. The
Administration proposes to remove the current restriction. This action, coupled with its proposals to
promote competition in local telephone service, will allow telephone companies and cable operators to
compete in providing a full range of video, voice, and data services to the public. To ensure that
cable firms and telephone companies do not harm consumers or competition in providing these
services, the Administration proposes safeguards, such as structural safeguards, nondiscriminatory
access obligations, anti-buyout provisions, and franchise obligations.
Finally, the Administration will put forth the proposal for a new Title VII to regulate two-way,
broadband transmission services, to encourage the development of these services. The Administration
believes that such services should be subject to less regulation.
Mr. Irving announced that he and Assistant Attorney General Anne Bingaman will testify on January
26 before the House Economic and Commercial Law Subcommittee on H.R. 3626 (the "MFJ bill")
and on January 27 before the House Telecommunications and Finance Subcommittee on H.R. 3636
(the "local competition bill") and H.R. 3626.
2
Mr. Irving stated that the legislative efforts are only part of the work of the Telecommunications
Policy Committee. The Committee has been busy with a number of other projects as well. On
November 19, 1993, NTIA hosted an Agenda Planning Conference for regulators at the Annenberg
Washington Program. Federal, state, and local regulators engaged in policy debate on NII issues.
The Committee will work with NTIA to publish a collection of papers entitled 20/20 Vision in
February/March. 20/20 Vision is a collection of telecommunications and information technology
experts' responses to the The National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action.
The Committee will sponsor two panels on universal service and open access issues as part of the
IITF's Public Interest Forum in February/March. The Committee also will work with NTIA to
publish an Notice of Inquiry on network access issues.
The Telecommunications Policy Committee has two working groups: (1) the Universal Service
Working Group, and (2) the International Telecommunications Policy Working Group. The Universal
Service Working Group has been assisting on issues related to NTIA's series of universal service field
hearings. The first field hearing on universal service took place on December 16 in Albuquerque,
New Mexico. Congressman Bingaman and DOC Deputy Secretary Barram participated in the
hearing. More than 50 witnesses and people from the public provided testimony. A second hearing
was scheduled in South Central Los Angeles on January 19, but was postponed due to the earthquake.
Mr. Irving noted that the International Telecommunications Policy Working Group also has been
active. This working group has generated a comprehensive outline of international issues affecting
the development of a global information infrastructure. The group has identified two cross-cutting
issues, international protection of intellectual property rights and privacy, which require coordination
across the IITF's Committees.
Mr. Irving stated that this spring the Committee will establish a Network Reliability Working Group
that will work with the private sector to reduce the vulnerability of the nation's information
infrastructure and ensure that it is designed and managed in a way that minimizes the impact of
accident or sabotage.
The Telecommunications Policy Committee will publish a six-month progress report on the status of
its NII activities.
Mr. Irving concluded his report by stating that many other important issues await debate and
resolution, such as broadcast and mass media issues, encouraging new entrants, and facilitating
handicapped access to the information infrastructure. Many issues may need to be addressed by
regulatory reforms, rather than legislation.
There were no questions for Mr. Irving, but there was some general discussion about the NII.
Secretary of Education Riley spoke about the Department of Education's interest in the NII and the
new information technologies.
Secretary Brown noted that a key issue that all of the IITF Committees are facing is security. On the
telecommunications side, a reliable network is essential for the NII to function. On the information
side, protection of individual privacy and intellectual property requires strong, easy-to-use security
technologies. Both of these kinds of applications mean new technologies are needed. To promote
3
coordination and cross-fertilization on security issues, Sally Katzen will soon be hosting a general
meeting on the subject of NII security, to be held in February.
Committee on Applications and Technology
Arati Prabhakar, Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology and Chair of the
Committee on Applications and Technology, gave her report. The Committee has two working
groups -- (1) the Government Information Technology Services Working Group; and (2) the
Technology Policy Working Group. The Government Information Technology Services Working
Group is formulating a strategic vision and an implementation plan for using government information
resources across and within government agencies. The group also is initiating interagency teams to
work on specific projects.
The Technology Policy Working Group was created to ask the tough technology questions about how
we can create interoperable and scalable technologies. The group will address the issue of how to lay
out the technology road maps. The need for a public-private dialogue is crucial here. This group
will be co-sponsoring with industry groups a conference on the NII at the end of February. The High
Performance Computing, Communications and Information Technology Subcommittee is coordinating
the technology programs. This is a critical piece of the NII effort.
Dr. Prabhakar then summarized the activities of the full Committee on Applications and Technology.
The Committee is compiling a list of current applications in each agency and the nature of the
application (e.g., government services, education). The Committee has put this information on-line.
This will provide easy reference for when a person asks, for example, what the government is doing
with respect to applications of technology to education.
The Committee also has examined NII issues that cut across applications arenas. The Committee
looked at the following application arenas: health care, environmental monitoring, manufacturing,
electronic commerce and telecommuting, government services, education, and libraries. The
important cross-cutting issues that emerged are: providing equitable access, user acceptance, privacy,
user training, organizational learning, private-sector acceptance of government technology, intellectual
property rights, information security, information access, information and data standards, conversion
of information, user-friendly hardware and software, interoperability standards, scalability, cost and
pricing, and public funding. The Committee's current project is the development of a group of NII
applications strategies. It will begin by focusing on the application areas listed above. The
Committee will provide a snapshot of where we are today and a road map for how we get to where
we want to be. The Committee is working with the Council on Competitiveness to enable the IITF
and the Council on Competitiveness to co-host an applications conference in the summer.
Information Policy Committee
Sally Katzen, Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, and Chair of the Information Policy Committee, reported on the
Committee's activities. The Committee has three working groups: (1) Privacy Working Group; (2)
Intellectual Property Working Group; and (3) Government Information Working Group. The Privacy
Working Group is putting together a statement of principles on the use and abuse of information --
"The Code of Fair Information Practices." The group has met with 30 experts to discuss potential
modifications.
4
The Government Information Working Group is developing the Government Information Locator
Service ("GILS"). GILS would help the public locate and access information throughout the federal
government. It would identify public information resources throughout the government agencies,
describe the information available in those resources, and assist in obtaining the information.
The Government Information Working Group has held two workshops on how to disseminate
government information. Several hundred people attended the workshops. It will host a third
workshop in April.
The Intellectual Property Working Group held a public hearing in November to hear testimony
regarding preserving intellectual property rights in the electronic age. The group will issue a report
by April 15.
ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE CHARTERS AND WORK PLANS
Secretary Brown moved for the adoption of the charters and work plans of the various committees.
The motion passed unanimously.
NII ADVISORY COUNCIL AND OUTREACH DISCUSSION
Secretary Brown stated that the NII Advisory Council is an extremely important asset. Its members
have a lot of talent and expertise. The Advisory Council can have valuable input on the question of
the role of government in the NII and on questions concerning privacy.
DEPARTMENT/AGENCY REPORTS ON ACTIVITIES TO PROMOTE THE NII
Department of Energy
The five priority Department of Energy infrastructure applications are: (1) environmental restoration
and waste minimization; (2) manufacturing; (3) education, focused at the pre-college level and on
involving more women and minorities in science; (4) digital libraries; and (5) energy demand and
supply management -- the ability of the consumer and the power companies to interactively determine
usage patterns (especially important given the power crisis in D.C. last Thursday).
DOE is the custodian of much environmental restoration data. The Department is talking with EPA,
DOC, and the States with respect to making this information available to the public.
DOE is working on interactive video over Internet. DOE has used the Internet in exercises with K-12
children in Tennessee, Iowa, and New Mexico. The Department also is developing an electronic
textbook using Mosaic.
NASA
NASA's contributions to the creation of a NII include: (1) applications of remote sensing data; (2)
education, training, and lifelong learning; and (3) health care and telemedicine; and (4) development
of digital libraries. NASA is working with DOE, NSF, and the Department of Education on
educational issues. It also is working with the U.S. Postal Service, the IRS, and EPA to develop
5
certification and authentification applications. In the area of health care, NASA has been involved in
using satellites to provide remote medical assistance.
The NII will be used improve NASA's ability to operate effectively. NASA hopes to institute
electronic contracting and solicitation. It seeks to use Internet to let the public direct questions to
NASA scientists.
EPA
EPA is currently putting environmental data bases on Internet. It is providing business with
information on pollution-prevention practices and technology. It is working to provide EPA's state
partners with e-mail access to EPA. EPA is developing its own software tool known as "Gateway,"
which will provide agency, other federal, and state databases to EPA users at the desktop.
The Intelligence Community
The Intelligence Community agencies depend greatly on access to information. NSA is concerned
with communications security and threats to the U.S. NII. The Intelligence Systems Board is
currently instituting e-mail throughout the Intelligence Community agencies and dealing with security
issues.
HUD
HUD is committed to improving access to information, especially information about the Community
Reinvestment Act and the Homeowners Disclosure Act regarding mortgages. Community groups and
lenders can benefit from such information. HUD also is working on putting information about small
businesses on line.
Department of Agriculture
The Department of Agriculture has been involved in programs promoting distance learning to rural
areas and loans to rural telephone companies for constructing digital switches. Over the past forty
years, the Department has furnished loans and loan guarantees through the Rural Electrification
Administration.
ADJOURNMENT
Secretary Brown stated that he was greatly encouraged by the number of creative ideas. He noted
that there is a lot of talent in the IITF and on the NII Advisory Council and we will call on it as we
go forward. Secretary Brown thanked everyone and adjourned the meeting at 12:00 p.m.
ATTENDEES:
Secretary Ronald H. Brown, DOC
Secretary Richard Riley, ED
Kathy Aterno, EPA
Duane Adams, DOD/ARPA
D. James Baker, DOC
6
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
002. minutes
re: NIITF meeting [partial] (2 pages)
01/25/1994
P3/b(3)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Council of Economic Advisers
Stiglitz, Joseph
OA/Box Number: 9563
FOLDER TITLE:
Telecommuncations - NII (National Information Infrastructure) [2]
2019-0203-F
jm2837
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
David Barram, DOC
Lawrence E. Barrett, SBA
Yvette Barrett, DOC/NTIA
James H. Billington, Library of Congress
Christopher Bullock, EPA
Melvyn Ciment, NSF
Stephen R. Colgate, DOJ
Roger M. Cooper, DOJ
(b)(3)
[ 002]
Carol C. Darr, DOC
Brad Delong, Treasury
Michele Farquhar, DOC/NTIA
Randy Feuerstein, Interior
James J. Flyzik, Treasury
Dirk Forrister, DOE
Howard Frank, DOC/APPA
Cita Furlani, DOC/NIST
Jock Gill, EOP/Media Affairs
John Gilsenan, State
Administrator Daniel S. Goldin, NASA
Adam M. Golodner, Agriculture
Jim Gray, TVA
Jane Bortnick Griffith, Library of Congress
John Grimes, DOD
Dan Grulke, DOD
Keith D. Hahn, NSC
Janet Handal, DOD/ARPA
Lee B. Holcomb, NASA
Larry Irving, DOC/NTIA
Administrator Roger Johnson, GSA
Anita K. Jones, DOD
Tom Kalil, NEC
Charles Kalina, HPCC/OSTP
Sally Katzen, OMB
Maureen Kennedy, HUD
Deborah Knopman, Interior
Madeline Kunin, ED
Kelly Levy, DOC/NTIA
Blair Levin, FCC
Robert E. Litan, DOJ
David Lytel, DOC/NIST
Sarah Maloney, DOC/NTIA
Mark N. Mandell, DOC/NIST
Vonya B. McCann, State
Bruce McConnell, OMB
Denise Michel, DOC
Alicia Munnell, Treasury
Edward Murphy, Treasury
7
David Nelson, DOE
Michael Nelson, OSTP
Robert Pepper, FCC
Robert Peters, Agriculture
Terry Peterson, ED
Robert Portman, Labor
Arati Prabhakar, DOC/NIST
Robert Reisner, U.S. Postal Service
Kathleen Roberts, DOC/NIST
Linda Roberts, ED
Jon Seymour, DOT
(b)(3)
Joe Stiglitz, CEA
Neil J. Stillman, DHHS
Jay Stowsky, CEA
Thomas J. Sugrue, DOC/NTIA
Eugene K. Taylor, DOT
Jim Vollman, Labor
William M. Webster, ED
Tatia Williams, DOC/NTIA
8
11/30/93 13:30
2023771635
NTIA
5
001
*
FAX FOR:
Bingaman, Litan
Stiglitz, Baker
Thornton
Edley
Neihardt
Kalil
Simon
Pepper
Nelson
Licht
Total of 5 pages including this cover sheet. If transmission is not
complete, please call 202-482-1835.
11/30/93
13:30
2023771635
NTIA
1
002
DRAFT
LEGISLATIVE OUTREACH TIMETABLE
Before
Vice President/Secretary Brown meetings: Vice
Dec. 20
President Gore and Secretary Brown to meet with
key House and Senate Committee Chairmen and
members
Late Dec./
Administration-hosted event: Vice President Gore-
early Jan.
hosted event (with Secretary Brown and Legislative
Task Force) related to telecommunications and
infrastructure development for key Hill
telecommunications policy staff
Early Jan.
Legislative outreach: Bingaman/Irving/others
to meet with key Senate and House Commerce and
Judiciary Members and staff
ongoing
Weekly Meetings with Hill staff: Legislative Task
Force representatives (NTIA, DOJ and others) to
meet with key Hill staff prior to introduction of
Administration bill
Jan. 21-
Introduction of bill: Public introduction of
early Feb.
Administration bill (depending on progress of
discussions with Hill Members and staff)
11/30/93 13:31 62023771635
NTIA
5.
003
DRAFT
LIST OF PRIVATE SECTOR REPRESENTATIVES
FOR THE VICE PRESIDENT'S MEETING ON NII LEGISLATION
RBOCS
Gary McBee, Chairman
United States Telephone Association
202/835-3100
John Clendenin, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
BellSouth Corporation
404/249-2000
William Ferguson, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
Nynex Corporation
212/370-7400
Richard McCormick, Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer
U S West
303/793-6500
UNITY COALITION
Brian Moir, Chairman
Unity Coalition
202/331-9852
--- plus one additional designate from the coalition to be
determined
LONG DISTANCE
Robert Allen, Chairman
AT&T
201/221-2000
G. M. Lowrie, Senior Vice President
Federal Government Affairs
AT&T's Washington Office
202/457-3802
Bert Roberts, President
MCI
202/872-1600
Gary M. Parsons, Senior Vice President
Corporate and Public Policy
MCI
202/887-2400
11/30/93
13:31
2023771635
NTIA
1
004
COMPETITIVE LONG DISTANCE
James M. Smith, President
Competitive Telecommunications Association
202/296-6650
Roy Wilkens, President and Chief Executive Officer
WilTel, Inc.
918/588-3342
Bernard Ebbers, President and Chief Executive Officer
LDDS Communications
601/360-8600
CABLE
Decker Anstrom, Acting President
National Cable Television Association
202/775-3651
Richard D. Roberts, Chairman
National Cable Television Association
804/624-5002
CELLULAR
Thomas E. Wheeler, President & Chief Executive Officer
Cellular Telephone Industry Association
202/785-0081
Wayne M. Perry, Chairman
Cellular Telephone Industry Association
206/828-8485
ALTERNATE ACCESS
Heather Burnett Gold, President
Association for Local Telecommunications Services
202/466-ALT1
Gary Lasher, Chairman
Association for Local Telecommunications Services
215/992-8507
2
11/30/93 13:32
2023771635
NTIA
5
005
NEWSPAPERS
Cathleen Black, President
Newspaper Association of America
202/638-4770
Donald E. Newhouse, Chairman
Newspaper Association of America
201/877-4141
MANUFACTURING
Alan (Mike) Fricschkorn, President
Telecommunications Industry Association
202/457-7737
Patrick Welker, Chairman
Telecommunications Industry Association
807/540-8265
BROADCAST
Edward O. Fritts, President
National Association of Broadcasters
202/429-5300
Gary R. Chapman, Chairman
National Association of Broadcasters
401/454-2880
COMPUTER INDUSTRY
On December 17th, the Computer Systems Policy Project will hold a
meeting of its members in Washington, D.C. The Vice President
might want to meet with the CSPP CEO's at that time. CSPP's
Executive Director is Ken Kay, 202/628-1700.
3
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS
si?
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20500
(MI)
February 7, 1994
MEMORANDUM FOR GREG SIMON
CHIEF DOMESTIC POLICY ADVISOR FOR
THE VICE PRESIDENT
FROM:
JONATHAN JOSEPH STIGLITZ BAKER Jos
SUBJECT:
Draft Letter to the Editor of the Wall Street
Journal
In response to your request, we have drafted a letter to the
editor of the Wall Street Journal for the Vice President to send
in response to Allan Murray's January 31, 1994 column on
universal service.
If you think it would be useful, we could expand on the
problems with the $20 billion figure Murray employs. Please let
us know if we can help further on this or other matters.
Attachment
DRAFT 2/7/94
To the Editor:
Imagine large numbers of citizens unable to use the public
library, stop by town hall, attend school, visit the movie
theater, shop at the mall, or go to work at an office downtown.
Their individual lives--and the life of our community--would be
tragically impoverished.
Yet this will be our future unless all Americans who desire
it have easy, affordable access to advanced communications and
information services. As the National Information Infrastructure
(NII) develops, society will increasingly turn to it for access
to education and community services, news and information,
entertainment and shopping, and work. And the NII itself will
become more valuable to each of us as more and more of our
friends and neighbors are connected to it.
In the early part of this century, when electric power
stopped being a curiosity and became a necessity, President
Franklin Roosevelt and the Congress developed a program to extend
electric service to previously unserved rural regions.
Similarly, the United States has long been committed to the
widespread availability of basic telephone service at affordable
rates. But as telecommunications capabilities advance, and the
NII develops, the concept of "universal service" must advance as
well. When advanced communications technologies become as
important to modern life as the telephone, electric power and
public schooling are today, we must ensure that these enhanced
services too are available to all.
For this reason, we must charge the FCC and the States with
continuing responsibility to review and revise universal service
objectives to meet changing circumstances. To get this process
underway, I recently challenged industry to connect all of our
classrooms, libraries, hospitals and clinics by the year 2000,
and I have been delighted with the private sector response.
Alan Murray's recent skepticism about the wisdom of our
Nation's universal service commitment is difficult to understand.
His first concern is that a revised universal service obligation
will be too expensive for the country to afford. Yet the primary
danger is just the reverse: our society cannot afford the
failure to connect large segments of our Nation to the
information highways. Just as Congress, the Executive Branch,
the FCC, and the States will share responsibility for reviewing
and revising the nature of our universal service obligation,
these governmental entities also will share responsibility for
meeting those obligations in a financially responsible manner.
(And the likely size of these obligations is far less than the
$20 billion figure Murray has unquestioningly adopted from a
study commissioned by the threatened local telephone companies.)
Murray's second concern--that access to the NII is somehow
not important because the information superhighway can supply
entertainment as well as education, employment, and health
information--is a remarkable complaint to read in a business-
oriented publication. We all recognize that a high school
auditorium is no less essential to a community because it is used
for dances and films as well as lectures, meet-the-candidates
programs, and job fairs. The same principle applies to the NII.
Finally, Murray complains that the benefits of universal
service will not be targeted to the poor. The Administration is
also concerned about ensuring access to the NII for the
disadvantaged. That is why our proposal will make it possible
for the FCC and the States to do so, and for them to identify
other appropriate beneficiaries for universal service subsidies--
including schools, hospitals, and those who now have access
"lifeline" telephone service.
We must avoid creating a society of information "haves" and
"have nots." The most important steps we are taking to
accomplish this end are to adopt policies that encourage
competition, and so result in lower prices for everyone. The
lower the price, the less need for subsidies. But in addition,
the Administration is committed to updating the concept of
universal service to recognize the information needs of the
American people in the 21st century.
Al Gore
12/07/93 14:05
2023771635
NTIA
DEC 7 - 4:00
1
001
OF
COMMERCE
st-It™ brand fax transmittal memo 7671
of pages
6
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Higlitz ,Joc
From
National Telecommunications and
Co.
Co.
Larry Ixving
is OF AMERICA
Washington. D.C. 20230
Dept.
Phone #
Fax #
Fax #
Information FSLT(MII) Administration
December 7, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR
Commerce:
Jonathan Sallet
Justice:
Ann Bingaman, Bob Litan, David Turetsky,
Rich Rosen
CEA:
Joe stiglitz, Jonathan Baker, Elizabeth
Schneirov
Leg. Affairs: Tracy Thornton
OMB:
Chris Edley, Jonas Neihardt, Sally Katzen,
Bruce McConnell
NEC:
Tom Kalil
OSTP:
Mike Nelson
OVP:
Greg Simon, Jim Kohlenberger
FCC:
Bob Pepper, Merrill Spiegel
FROM:
Larry Irving &
SUBJECT:
Background for Today's Conference
Call, 4:00 p.m.
Attached is a copy of the regulatory asymmetry options memo
for this afternoon's conference call.
Please note the dates and times (room number subject to
change) for the next two meetings of the Legislative Task Force:
-- Thursday, 3:00-6:00 p.m., Room 230 OEOB
(includes one hour session w/CSPP staff at 3:00)
-- Monday, 2:00-6:00 p.m., Room 230 OEOB
(includes two or three hour session with panel of
telecommunications experts/academics)
Attachment
12/07/93 14:05
'2023771635
NTIA
$
002
DRAFT December 3, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR: The Vice President
Secretary Brown
FROM:
Legislative Drafting Team
SUBJECT:
NII LEGISLATION
As you know, there is general consensus within the Administration that, in
drafting NII legislation, we will propose allowing telephone companies (telcos) to
provide video programming in their local telephone service areas, subject to certain
conditions and safeguards, including some form of nondiscriminatory access or
common carrier obligations (e.g., the "video dialtone" rules adopted by the FCC in
July 1992). Both telecommunications reform bills now pending in Congress (S.
1086 and H.R. 3636) adopt this general approach, although they differ about the
associated conditions and safeguards.
However, if telco entry into video services occurs subject to such common
carrier obligations, telcos will be subject to regulatory requirements not faced by
their principal competitors - incumbent cable systems. There are concerns that
such "asymmetric regulation" may give cable systems an unwarranted competitive
advantage. The attached memorandum offers several options for addressing this
potential problem, as well as the pros and cons of each alternative.
12/07/93
14:06
2023771635
NTIA
1
003
THE APPROPRIATE REGULATORY TREATMENT
OF TELCOS AND CABLE SYSTEMS WHEN THE PROVIDE VIDEO SERVICES
Option 1: Retain the "current" approach (assuming some form of pending
legislation passes) - Telcos providing video services will be subject to statutory
common carrier obligations not faced by competing cable systems.
Pros
Cons
Major changes to the present
Cable systems are now the dominant
structure will be difficult. It is
providers of video distribution
highly unlikely, for example, that
facilities. Arguably, expanded
Congress will impose common carrier
common carrier obligations for cable
obligations on cable systems so soon
are appropriate whether or not telcos
after it altered the cable regulatory
become video companies. Telco entry
landscape in 1992.
into cable could be the occasion to
impose such obligations. Conversely,
Imposing common carrier obligations
action that would permit cable
on cable firms now, given current
companies to offer telephone service
technology, would be disruptive to
might be the occasion for this
existing cable systems and their
treatment.
subscribers, at least where capacity
is, or is nearly, filled already.
Moreover, cable systems may become
the dominant providers of switched
Cable firms are already subject to
broadband facilities in the long run.
common carrier-like "leased access"
Failing to impose common carrier
requirements, which the FCC is now
obligations now may make it more
assessing on reconsideration.
difficult to do so later.
It is even more unlikely that Congress
Asymmetric regulation creates the
will allow telcos to provide video in
paradoxical situation that new telco
their service areas without some
entrants in the video market will face
common carrier obligations:
regulatory burdens not imposed on
incumbent cable systems.
Virtually all parties involved in the
debate over telco entry, including
If the goal is to increase competition
telcos themselves, assume some such
in delivery of video services, removal
obligations.
of as many regulatory burdens as
possible on new entrants may be
Where telcos provide voice, data,
appropriate. In a competitive
and video services over integrated
environment, regulatory requirements
transmission facilities, it would be
may be unnecessary and, potentially
difficult to treat portions of those
counterproductive. Thus it might be
facilities differently for regulatory
possible to couple the imposition of
purposes.
nondiscriminatory access
requirements with freedom from
There are concerns that telcos may
other, more burdensome,
use their dominant position in the
requirements.
local telephone services market to
become the dominant providers of
video distribution facilities in the long
term. Imposing a common carrier
obligation on them now may avoid
problems in the future.
12/07/93
14:06
2023771635
NTIA
1
004
2
Option 2: Treat telcos as common carriers; provide inducements for cable
systems to provide facilities on a common carrier basis or condition common
carrier treatment on the entry of cable into telco services: Eliminate franchise
requirements, rate regulation, and other Cable Act restrictions for cable systems, or
condition cable entry into telco services, on the voluntary provision by cable
companies of access to their distribution facilities on a nondiscriminatory or
common carrier basis. [Note: Presumably under the "inducement" approach the
same requirements would be eliminated for telcos offering video services as well.]
Pros
Cons
Creating cable common carrier
This approach would not eliminate the
obligations in this fashion would be
regulatory asymmetry between cable
less disruptive to cable systems and
and telcos in the short run. [With
their customers than would imposition
current cable technology, it would be
of such requirements.
difficult for many cable systems to
elect the common carrier option.] Nor
Although Congress may be unwilling
is it certain to eliminate that
to impose common carrier obligations
asymmetry in the long term.
on cable systems, it may be less
opposed to the notion of inducing
Congress would likely not agree to
systems to accept such obligations in
free cable systems from the various
return for major regulatory relief, or
Cable Act requirements, even in
when cable enters areas traditionally
return for cable's assumption of
regulated on a common carrier basis.
common carrier responsibilities unless,
at the very least, cable systems faced
some actual competition. In fact,
both S. 1086 and H.R. 3636
contemplate imposing certain Cable
Act requirements on telco video
providers even though they will also
have common carrier obligations.
Imposing common carrier obligations
on cable companies' video service
offerings upon their provision of telco
services would create a disincentive
for cable companies to offer telco
services.
12/07/93 14:07
2023771635
NTIA
1
005
3
Option 3: Retain the "current approach," but instruct the FCC to reconsider
whether to impose some types of common carrier obligations on cable systems at
some specified future date(s) (e.g., [] years after enactment of legislation; every []
years after enactment). Give the FCC authority to impose such obligations if
necessary.
Pros
Cons
The approach proposed in Option 2
This approach would not eliminate the
may not induce enough cable systems
regulatory asymmetry between cable
voluntarily to assume common carrier
and telcos for a considerable period of
responsibilities. Further government
time, if at all.
action may be needed.
This approach may create uncertainty
Delegating the question to an expert
with the cable industry as to the
administrative agency means that the
regulatory landscape in the future.
issue will be considered with a
thoroughness, speed, and subtlety
that frequently is not possible in the
legislative area.
The following proposal addresses concerns that large cable multiple system
operators may have sufficient market power to impede the growth of new video
programming and, thereby, reduce the diversity of programming available to
consumers. It could be adopted independently or in conjunction with the options
discussed above.
private carn
basic
12/07/93
14:07
2023771635
NTIA
1
006
4
Option 4: Cable operators that serve more than [ ]% of all households
subscribing to cable television nationwide must divest their ownership interests in
any cable programming within [] years, unless they afford unaffiliated
programming providers nondiscriminatory access to the operators' cable systems.
Pros
Cons
There are legitimate concerns that
Because it is difficult to determine the
cable operators serving a significant
share of nationwide subscribers that
portion of the nation's cable
would give a cable operator market
subscribers may, by denying access
power vis-a-vis programmers, any
to their systems, prevent the
subscribership trigger for divestiture
development and growth of new
would be somewhat arbitrary.
video programming sources and
diminish the diversity of programming
Barring firms from owning
available to television viewers.
programming would raise serious First
Amendment issues, as well as
Foregoing divestiture in return for a
eliminate possible economic
cable operators' acceptance of
efficiencies associated with vertical
common carrier obligations may
integration.
secure the best of both worlds: (1)
the efficiency benefits of vertical
Congress addressed cable
integration between programmers and
programming issues in the 1992
distributors and (2) creation of
Cable Act by imposing a variety of
common carrier obligations that would
measures on program access, as well
substantially reduce cable systems to
as limitations on cable system
adversely affect further growth in the
ownership of programming carried on
programming market.
their systems. It is unlikely that
Congress would be eager to revisit
this controversial area so soon after
the 1992 Act.
Opposition from affected cable
operators would be strong and
focused.
FSCT
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 8, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR THE VICE PRESIDENT
FROM:
JONATHAN BAKER
SENIOR ECONOMIST, COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS
MICHAEL NELSON
SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY,
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
SUBJECT:
Possible NII Signature Items
The NII Legislative Working Group has been discussing the
following possible "signature items" for an Administration bill
on telecommunications policy. You may wish to raise any or all
of these possibilities in your upcoming discussions with
Congressional leaders. Detailed proposals will be submitted for
your review later.
1.
Regulatory evolution: Creating a regulatory framework that
will allow regulation to be tailored to changing competitive
conditions in the relevant markets and permit regulation to
"wither away" when competition makes it unnecessary.
This proposal would distinguish the Administration's
legislative proposal from existing bills by incorporating a
long-run vision. It would promote private investment in the
information infrastructure by offering firms the prospect of
freedom from unnecessary regulatory constraints. The FCC's
ability to do this under the current Communications Act is
limited.
2.
Unbundling: Allowing RBOCs to enter all lines of business
if they agree to "unbundle" the "local loop," along with
adopting certain safeguards to protect against regulatory
evasion and anticompetitive discrimination against rivals.
The form of the necessary safeguards is under discussion
(e.g., divestiture of the local loop, separate affiliates,
and/or regulatory prohibitions against discrimination).
3.
Regulatory symmetry: Giving the FCC the authority to impose
common carrier obligations on cable systems when those
systems provide two-way services, in order to ensure
"regulatory symmetry" and open access.
You accepted the broad outline of this proposal this morning
(option 3).
4.
Programming ownership restrictions: Prohibiting cable
operators and telephone companies that provide cable
television from owning cable programming if they serve more
than a minimum fraction of households nationwide.
You accepted the broad outline of this proposal this morning
(option 4) .
5.
Widespread availability: Strengthening the provisions in
existing legislative proposals for "universal service" for
everyone and "open access" for all service providers.
6.
Improving governmental responsiveness: Obtaining "fast
track" consideration by Congress and/or the FCC of Executive
Branch (e.g. NTIA) recommendations for modifications of
statutes or agency rules, and/or revising administrative
procedures imposed by the courts that slow FCC rulemaking.
JES
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20500
December 2, 1993
Statem)
MEMORANDUM FOR NII LEGISLATIVE WORKING GROUP
FROM:
JONATHAN B. BAKER
SENIOR ECONOMIST
SUBJECT:
Recent Studies of Job Creation from Lifting Line-
of-Business Restrictions on Baby Bells
Last July, the WEFA Group, a private consulting firm hired
by the seven Baby Bell companies, issued a study of the
consequences of lifting legal restrictions that keep the Bell
Operating Companies from providing long-distance telephone
service and video programming, and from manufacturing
telecommunications equipment. The study concluded that removing
the restrictions would generate 3.6 million new jobs, increase
real GDP by $247 billion, and save consumers a total of $630
billion over the next decade. According to a follow-up study
issued in November by the Economic Policy Institute, the new jobs
would be quality, high wage jobs with attractive demographics:
they would tend to go to less-educated blue-collar workers,
minorities, and unionized sectors. Because the claimed benefits
of ending the line-of-business restrictions are enormous, I
thought it worthwhile to review the WEFA study, talk with its
author, and share what I have learned.
My primary conclusion is that the study is not really about
the benefits of removing line-of-business restrictions on the
Baby Bells. It merely assumes, with no serious analysis, that
removing the line-of-business restrictions would lead to a 50
percent reduction in the average price of telecommunications
services (relative to what otherwise would have occurred) over
the next 10 years. Accordingly, any regulatory change or
technological innovation that results in a 50 percent decline in
the average price of telecommunications services over the next
decade would generate the same economic benefits.
Moreover, over two-thirds of the consumer benefits claimed
by the study come from lowering the price of long-distance
services. Long-distance prices are assumed to fall because an
additional firm, the local Baby Bell, will compete with the three
leading long-distance providers (AT&T, MCI, and Sprint). While
more competition in the long-distance market would surely be
beneficial, it is implausible that adding one significant long-
distance carrier will so increase the degree of competition and
innovation in that market that it will effectively halve the
average price of telecommunications services.
2
It is not surprising that a 50 percent decline in the price
of services in an important sector of the economy would create
terrific economic gains. (A 50 percent decline in the price of
oil would have similarly enormous economic benefits.) The main
problem with the WEFA study is that it fails to explain why
freeing the RBOCs from line-of-business restrictions would lead
to such a price decline.
12/07/93
18:51
202 482 1635
NTIA
001
FSiT
DRAFT December 7, 1993
(Them NTI)
MEMORANDUM FOR:
The Vice President
Secretary Brown
FROM:
Legislative Drafting Team
SUBJECT:
NII LEGISLATION
As you know, there is general consensus within the Administration that, in
drafting NII legislation, we will propose allowing telephone companies (telcos) to
provide video programming in their local telephone service areas, subject to certain
conditions and safeguards, including some form of common carrier obligations
(e.g., the "video dialtone" rules adopted by the FCC in July 1992). The use of the
term "common carrier" implies nondiscriminatory access and interconnection
obligations, as well as government authority to regulate prices (although that
authority might not be exercised). Both telecommunications reform bills now
pending in Congress (S. 1086 and H.R. 3636) adopt this general approach,
although they differ about the associated conditions and safeguards.
However, if telco entry into video services occurs subject to such common
carrier obligations, telcos will be subject to regulatory requirements not faced by
their principal competitors -- incumbent cable systems. There are concerns that
such "asymmetric regulation" may give cable systems an unwarranted competitive
advantage. The attached memorandum offers several options for addressing this
potential problem, as well as the pros and cons of each alternative. This
memorandum assumes that such regulations will be removed when, because of
increased competition, they are no longer necessary.
Post-It™ brand fax transmittal memo 7671
# of pages 4
To J. BAKER
From
Co.
M. FANQUITAR
Co.
Dept.
Phone #
Fax #
Fax #
Post-It™ brand fax transmittal memo 7671
To
# of pages 4
TOE STI64T2
From
Co.
n. FARQUHAR
Co.
Dept.
Phone #
Fax #
Fax #
12/07/93 18:51
202 482 1635
NTIA
5.
002
THE APPROPRIATE REGULATORY TREATMENT
OF TELCOS AND CABLE SYSTEMS WHEN THE PROVIDE VIDEO SERVICES
Option 1: Retain the "current" approach (assuming some form of pending
legislation passes) Telcos providing video services will be subject to statutory
common carrier obligations not faced by competing cable systems.
Pros
Cons
Major changes to the present
Cable systems are now the dominant
structure will be difficult. It is
providers of video distribution
highly unlikely, for example, that
facilities. Arguably, expanded
Congress will impose common carrier
common carrier obligations for cable
obligations on cable systems so soon
are appropriate whether or not telcos
after it altered the cable regulatory
become video companies. Telco entry
landscape in 1992.
into cable could be the occasion to
impose such obligations. Conversely,
Imposing common carrier obligations
action that would permit cable
on cable firms now, given current
companies to offer telephone service
technology, would be disruptive to
might be the occasion for this
existing cable systems and their
treatment.
subscribers, at least where capacity
is, or is nearly, filled already.
Moreover, cable systems may become
the dominant providers of switched
Cable firms are already subject to
broadband facilities in the long run.
common carrier-like "leased access"
Failing to impose common carrier
requirements, which the FCC is now
obligations now may make it more
assessing on reconsideration.
difficult to do so later.
It is even more unlikely that Congress
Asymmetric regulation creates the
will allow telcos to provide video in
paradoxical situation that new telco
their service areas without some
entrants in the video market will face
common carrier obligations:
regulatory burdens not imposed on
incumbent cable systems.
Virtually all parties involved in the
debate over telco entry, including
If the goal is to increase competition
telcos themselves, assume some such
in delivery of video services, removal
obligations.
of as many regulatory burdens as
possible on new entrants may be
Where telcos provide voice, data,
appropriate. In a competitive
and video services over integrated
environment, regulatory requirements
transmission facilities, it would be
may be unnecessary and, potentially
difficult to treat portions of those
counterproductive. Thus it might be
facilities differently for regulatory
possible to couple the imposition of
purposes.
nondiscriminatory access
requirements with freedom from
There are concerns that telcos may
other, more burdensome,
use their dominant position in the
requirements.
local telephone services market to
become the dominant providers of
video distribution facilities in the long
term. Imposing a common carrier
obligation on them now may avoid
problems in the future.
12/07/93 18:52
202 482 1635
NTIA
003
2
Option 2: Treat cable systems as common carriers when they provide "two-
way" services; if they do so, provide relief from certain forms of cable regulation:
When cable companies offer two-way services, they would be treated as common
carriers. However, at the same time, franchise requirements, cable rate regulation,
and other Cable Act restrictions for cable systems would be eliminated. [Note:
Presumably under this approach the same requirements would be eliminated for
telcos offering video services as well.]
Pros
Cons
Creating cable common carrier
This approach would not eliminate the
obligations in this fashion would be
regulatory asymmetry between cable
less disruptive to cable systems and
and telcos in the short run.
their customers than would imposition
of such requirements at the present
Congress would likely not agree, and
time.
it may be poor public policy, to free
cable systems from the various Cable
Although Congress may be unwilling
Act requirements, even in return for
to impose common carrier obligations
cable's assumption of common carrier
on cable systems, it may be less
responsibilities unless, at the very
opposed to the notion of inducing
least, cable systems faced some
systems to accept such obligations in
actual competition. In fact, both S.
return for major regulatory relief, or
1086 and H.R. 3636 contemplate
when cable enters areas traditionally
imposing certain Cable Act
regulated on a common carrier basis.
requirements on telco video providers
even though they will also have
common carrier obligations.
Imposing common carrier obligations
on cable companies' video service
offerings upon their provision of two-
way services would create a
disincentive for cable companies to
offer such services.
12/07/93 18:52
202 482 1635
NTIA
1.
004
3
Option 3: Retain the "current approach," but instruct the FCC to reconsider
whether to impose some types of common carrier obligations on cable systems
either (a) at some specified future date(s) (e.g., [] years after enactment of
legislation; every [] years after enactment), or (b) pursuant to criteria established
in legislation that would identify the market conditions that would warrant
reexamination. Give the FCC authority to impose such obligations if necessary.
Pros
Cons
The approach proposed in Option 2
This approach potentially would not
may not induce enough cable systems
eliminate the regulatory asymmetry
to assume common carrier
between cable and telcos for some
responsibilities. Further government
time, if at all.
action may be needed.
This approach may create uncertainty
Delegating the question to an expert
with the cable industry as to the
administrative agency means that the
regulatory landscape in the future.
issue will be considered with a
thoroughness, speed, and subtlety
that frequently is not possible in the
legislative area.
This approach provides flexibility to
require regulatory symmetry when it
is appropriate, and permits the FCC to
decide when that moment occurs and
the types of obligations that should
apply.
12/07/93 18:53
202 482 1635
NTIA
1.
005
4
The following proposal addresses concerns that large cable multiple system
operators may have sufficient market power to impede the growth of new video
programming and, thereby, reduce the diversity of programming available to
consumers. It could be adopted independently or in conjunction with the options
discussed above.
Option 4: Cable operators and telcos that serve more than [ 1% of all households
subscribing to cable television nationwide (e.g., 20%) must divest their ownership
interests in any cable programming within [ ] years.
Pros
Cons
There are legitimate concerns that
Because it is difficult to determine the
cable operators serving a significant
share of nationwide subscribers that
portion of the nation's cable
would give a cable operator market
subscribers may, by denying access
power vis-a-vis programmers, any
to their systems, prevent the
subscribership trigger for divestiture
development and growth of new
would be somewhat arbitrary.
video programming sources and
diminish the diversity of programming
Cable operators can be expected to
available to television viewers.
argue that barring firms from owning
programming would raise serious First
This option preserves the efficiency
Amendment issues, as well as
benefits of vertical integration
eliminate possible economic
between programmers and distributors
efficiencies associated with vertical
for those cable systems and telcos
integration. (DOJ and CEA,
under the percentage limit.
respectively, do not believe these
concerns to be significant.)
Congress addressed cable
programming issues in the 1992
Cable Act by imposing a variety of
measures on program access, as well
as limitations on cable system
ownership of programming carried on
their systems. It is unlikely that
Congress would be eager to revisit
this controversial area so soon after
the 1992 Act.
Political opposition from affected
cable operators would be strong and
focused.
F Sit
Shelest
THE VICE PRESIDENT
WASHINGTON
Buker
December 2, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT AND AGENCIES
FROM:
THE VICE PRESIDENT
RE:
NEXT STEPS FOR THE INFORMATION
INFRASTRUCTURE TASK FORCE
Attached is a memo from Secretary Ron Brown summarizing the first meeting of the
Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF) and outlining the plans of the task force. I
attended the meeting and was impressed by the progress that the IITF has made and the
strong commitment of the participating agencies to promoting the development and use of
"information superhighways."
As discussed at the first IITF meeting, the Administration is moving ahead
aggressively to (1) accelerate the development of the National Information Infrastructure
(NII), (2) ensure that all Americans can enjoy the benefits of that infrastructure, and
(3) improve the way the Federal government uses information technology. The attached
memo describes ways your agency can contribute to this effort. For example, it follows up
on my request for a short report from each agency on existing and planned activities to
promote the NII.
At the meeting, we discussed the key role that information technology can play in
reinventing government. I am personally very interested in seeing that all Federal employees
have access to a government-wide electronic mail system and, through it, the Internet. With
your help, this could be accomplished quite quickly.
Thanks again for your support of this important Administration initiative.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE
Washington, D.C. 20230
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
November 26, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR
HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
SUBJECT:
FOLLOW-UP TO THE OCTOBER 27 MEETING OF THE
INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE TASK FORCE
On October 27, I convened the first meeting of the Information Infrastructure Task
Force (IITF), which the President created to propose and help formulate and implement
policies and initiatives needed to accelerate deployment of the National Information
Infrastructure (NII). Both Vice President Gore and I were pleased with the level of
agency involvement in and enthusiasm for the IITF. Our first meeting demonstrated a
broad commitment to the Administration's NII goals outlined in The National Information
Infrastructure: Agenda for Action, and we achieved consensus on an ambitious and
productive workplan for the Task Force. The Vice President and I appreciate your
contribution to this important initiative and look forward to working with you and your
staff to implement our workplan. At its first meeting, the Task Force took the following
actions, several of which involve your department:
Agreed that all Federal employees should have access to government-wide
electronic mail and directed the Committee on Applications and Technology
(previously called the "Applications Committee") (through its Government
Information Technology Services Working Group) to report to the IITF in January
on our progress. To assist in this effort, the interagency Electronic Mail Task
Force will launch a survey to gather baseline statistics on agency connectivity.
Please reply promptly.
Directed the Committee on Applications and Technology to report to the Task
Force in January with an inventory of all agencies' current and planned activities
to promote the NII. If your agency has not done so, please report to the
Committee on Applications and Technology by December 10 on your agency's
NII-related efforts, including how your agency will use networking and computer
technology to "reinvent government."
Approved the charters and workplans of the Task Force's committees-
Telecommunications Policy Committee, Committee on Applications and
Technology, and Information Technology Committee.
Additional information on these action items is attached. Also attached is a public
summary of the IITF meeting (for distribution to the private sector), a government-internal
IITF meeting summary, and information on the IITF Secretariat, which will be managed
by the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information
Administration.
Please note that the next meeting of the IITF will be held on Tuesday,
January 25, 1994, at 10:00 a.m. (location to be announced). I look forward to seeing
you there.
GOVERNMENT-WIDE ELECTRONIC MAIL
The IITF agreed on the need for Federal employees to have access to government-wide
electronic mail. In some agencies, almost every employee who has a computer is linked
to the Internet, enabling rapid communications with colleagues throughout the
Government and throughout the country, and giving employees access to thousands of
databases around the world. Electronic mail is something that can be accomplished
relatively quickly and inexpensively. There are concerns about costs, standards, and
security, but many agencies have already demonstrated that these issues can be
addressed.
The Task Force urges all agencies to make electronic mail access a top priority. In order
to achieve this goal, the Government-wide Electronic Mail Task Force (EMTF) will track
performance measures of our progress. Chartered by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), the EMTF will report these findings to the Committee on Applications
and Technology's Government Information Technology Services (GITS) Working Group.
The EMTF is about to launch a survey to gather baseline statistics on agency
connectivity, to which you should respond promptly. The EMTF contact is Dr. Neil
Stillman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for IRM at the Department of Health and Human
Services. He can be reached by phone at 202-690-6162, by fax at 202-690-8715 or by
Internet at [email protected]
INVENTORY OF GOVERNMENT NII APPLICATIONS
The IITF directed the Committee on Applications and Technology to provide a complete
inventory of current and planned activities by January. The Committee will widely
disseminate the results to the public electronically and in written form.
All agencies should complete their submissions to the inventory by December 10th. The
information should be in the form provided by the Committee and include a few lines
summarizing the goal of the project. Indicate whether the application is in the area of
education, electronic commerce, environment, government services, health, libraries,
manufacturing, or other.
Your agency's report should include those efforts which will use networking and
computing technology to: improve the productivity of your agency's employees by
providing them with better communications and access to information, improve service
to your "customers" and assist the private sector in developing and deploying parts of the
NII (e.g. through pilot projects). The latest version of the Committee's inventory is
available electronically (request instructions from [email protected] or contact Bill
Anderson at 301-975-2174 or [email protected]) or contact Cita Furlani by phone
at 301-975-4529, by fax at 301-216-0529 or by Internet at [email protected].
IITF COMMITTEE CHARTERS AND WORKPLANS
The IITF approved the charters and workplans for its three committees. The Committees
and their working groups are summarized below. For more detailed information please
refer to the October 27th IITF Briefing Book.
The Committee on Applications and Technology is coordinating the Administration's
efforts to develop, demonstrate, and promote applications of information technology in
manufacturing, education, health care, government services, libraries, and other social
services. Arati Prabhakar, Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology,
chairs the Committee. The Committee recently created the GITS Working Group and
plans to establish a second working group on technology policy.
The mission of the GITS Working Group will be to promote the improvement of agency
performance through the use of information technology, accelerate the deployment of
advanced networking technologies, and in conjunction with OMB and General Services
Administration (GSA), establish procurement and implementation policies designed to
improve productivity and reduce costs. The Working Group will be chaired by James
Flyzik, Director of Telecommunications Management for the Department of Treasury.
Mr. Flyzik served as co-leader of the National Performance Review's Information
Technology Team. The Working Group will help implement the National Performance
Review recommendations concerning information technology. In addition, it will consult
with state and local governments to promote cooperation and information sharing and
will make maximum use of existing interagency councils, working groups, task forces,
and teams to carry out its objectives.
NOTE: Immediately after the IITF meeting on October 27th, 1993, the Applications
Committee established a second working group on technology policy and, in the
process, changed the name of the Committee to the Committee on Applications and
Technology. The Technology Policy Working Group will address cross-cutting issues
related to interoperability and scalability. The Working Group is expected to deal with
issues such as protocols, standards, and interfaces, and to address such questions as
government policy regarding high speed networks (ATM), HDTV, and other standards of
vital importance to the NII. This Working Group will be chaired by Duane Adams,
Deputy Director of ARPA and membership will be drawn from the agencies participating
in the Committee on Applications and Technology.
The Telecommunications Policy Committee, chaired by Larry Irving, Assistant Secretary
of Commerce for Communication and Information and Administrator, National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, will formulate consistent
Administration positions on key telecommunications and infrastructure issues. Two
working groups report to the Telecommunications Policy Committee: the Universal
Service Working Group, chaired by Larry Irving, and the International
Telecommunications Policy Working Group, chaired by Carol Darr, Deputy General
Counsel of the Department of Commerce. The Universal Service Working Group will
work to ensure that all Americans have access to and enjoy the benefits of the NII. The
International Telecommunications Policy Working Group will examine
telecommunications issues in an international context.
The Information Policy Committee is addressing critical information policy issues and has
three working groups: Intellectual Property Rights, Privacy, and Government
Information. The Information Policy Committee is chaired by Sally Katzen, head of the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at OMB.
The Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights is chaired by Bruce Lehman,
Assistant Secretary and Commissioner of the Patent and Trademark Office of the
Department of Commerce. It will develop proposals for protecting copyrights and other
intellectual property rights in an electronic world.
The Working Group on Privacy is headed by Pat Faley, Acting Director of the Office of
Consumer Affairs, Department of Health and Human Services. This group will design
Administration policies to protect individual privacy in the context of the rapid increase
in the collection, storage and dissemination of personal data in electronic form.
The Working Group on Government Information is chaired by Bruce McConnell, Chief
of OMB's Information Policy Branch, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. This
group focuses on ways to promote the dissemination of government information in
electronic form.
IITF SECRETARIAT
The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) will serve as
the Secretariat for the IITF and for the private sector NII Advisory Council. The
Secretariat will serve as the repository of all IITF information and as the coordinator of
meetings, minutes and general correspondence. (A list of Secretariat functions is
attached and more detailed information will be forthcoming). The contact person is
Yvette Barrett. Please direct any questions you may have to her by phone at
202-482-1551, by fax at 202-482-1635 or by Internet at [email protected]
Again, thank you for your department's participation. I look forward to meeting with
you in January.
Rond RONALD H. BROWN Brown
THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S
INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE TASK FORCE
Chair: Ronald H. Brown, Secretary of Commerce
Government-Internal Minutes of October 27, 1993, Meeting
TIME AND PLACE: 1:00 p.m. Vice President's Ceremonial Office,
Old Executive Office Building
PURPOSE To demonstrate a broad commitment to the Administration's goals outlined in The
National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action and to achieve consensus on an
ambitious and productive workplan for the Task Force.
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING
OPENING REMARKS
Secretary Brown opened the meeting with welcoming remarks. Vice President Gore opened his
remarks by noting how committed the Administration is to the success of this initiative. He
stressed that everyone at the meeting would have critical roles in tackling difficult issues such as
updating regulations that restrict investment in telecommunications, privacy protection, spectrum
allocation and intellectual property protection. He requested a plan within 60 days outlining
how each agency can contribute to and benefit from the NII. Each agency plan should broadly
outline project goals and if possible, provide information on funding levels. The agency reports
should flow through the Applications and Technology Committee (previously called the
"Applications Committee").
IITF OVERVIEW
Secretary Brown remarked that he is committed both to the subject matter and to the interagency
process. He noted how The National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action, released
September 15, is a solid foundation for the implementation of the NII, adding that the purpose of
the document was not to set positions, but to generate some momentum. He emphasized that
the time to act is now since so much is happening in industry and on the Hill. The IITF will
work with organized labor, state and local governments and Congress. He stressed forging a
close partnership with the private sector while remaining conscious of the rural areas. The
Advisory Council will help gather input and lay the groundwork to work through complex
issues.
IITF COMMITTEE REPORTS
Sally Katzen, Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), chairs the Information Policy Committee. The Information
Policy Committee works on legal and policy issues that may interfere with the goal of making the
NII the nation's primary information channel. In addition, the Committee works on such
crosscutting issues as security. Three working groups report to the Information Policy
Committee: Privacy, Intellectual Property and Government Information.
Vice President Gore asked whether the mechanism of blanket licensing would be as useful in
software as it is in the music industry. Ms. Katzen responded that he provided a useful avenue
to explore.
The Working Group on Privacy was formed to design Administration policies to protect
individual privacy despite the rapid increase in the collection, storage and dissemination of
personal data in electronic form. The Group would like to see a statement of Fair Information
Practices and Principles, and possibly a Privacy Protection Board. Ms. Katzen described the
purpose of the Government Information Working Group as fostering the dissemination of
government information. OMB recently revised A-130 and is now studying agency
implementation if it. OMB will conduct a workshop on November 8 to teach electronic
dissemination techniques. Also being established is a Government Information Locator System.
Larry Irving, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information and Chair of
the Telecommunications Policy Committee gave his Committee's report. The
Telecommunications Policy Committee has held three meetings. The August and September
meetings addressed the NII: Agenda for Action. At the October 6th meeting the Committee
began to look at regulatory issues and S. 1086. Other issues to be considered include
investment, coordination with state and local governments, network reliability, and
interconnection and interoperability. In addition, there is an ambitious private sector outreach
program and a 20/20 Vision Project that asks telecommunications intellectuals to respond to the
Agenda for Action.
The Telecommunications Policy Committee has thus far formed two working groups: Universal
Service and International Telecommunications Policy. The purpose of the Universal Service
Working Group is to ensure that both consumers and producers can achieve the access that they
need. There will be universal service field hearings this year and in 1994.
The International Telecommunications Policy Working Group is chaired by Carol Darr, Deputy
General Counsel of Department of Commerce. It will look at international issues that impact
telecommunications policy.
David Barram, Deputy Secretary of Commerce, delivered the presentation for the Applications
and Technology Committee which is chaired by Arati Prabhakar, Director of the National
Institute of Standards and Technology. By October 30 the Applications and Technology
Committee expects to have a list of projects online. By December 15 the Applications and
Technology Committee will have identified private sector stakeholders and will have established
an electronic forum for discussion and public input.
Reporting to the Applications and Technology Committee will be the Government Information
Technology Services (GITS) Working Group, to be chaired by James Flyzik, Director of
Telecommunications Management for the Department of the Treasury. GITS will be established
before January 1 and will work on a strategy for government information technology
development.
2
APPROVAL OF CHARTERS AND DISCUSSION
The Committee approved the charters and workplans of the IITF's three Committees:
Telecommunications Policy, Applications and Technology, and Information Technology.
Secretary Brown asked Task Force members to share with the group means of improving the
government's information technology.
Brian Fontes, FCC Chief of Staff, commented that the licensing process at the FCC can take some
time and that a number of industry groups have asked that the FCC allow electronic filing, which
has been done on an experimental basis.
Dave Nelson of the Department of Energy commented that his department has implemented a
new technology that will have a significant impact on the workplace. This technology is
MBONE, which can run on high end PCs that offer video and white boards. As a multicast
system, it can operate coast-to-coast and telecast major meetings.
Dan Golden, NASA Administrator, stated that NASA has done electronic conferencing, especially
for procurement and small business, for quite some time.
Vice President Gore added that a Presidential Executive Order on that topic had been recently
signed.
Anne Bingaman, Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division asked why the entire government
is not on Internet. Vice President Gore responded, "Sounds like a job for reinvention," and then
directed the Electronic Mail Task Force to explore the issue and to track performance measures of
government progress.
Vice President Gore raised the issue that computer people in various departments are worried
about security and that the topic of security demands more time and attention than it should.
Others raised concern about the procurement process and whether that would impede progress
on the NII. Secretary Brown charged the Applications and Technology Committee with looking
into the issue.
SUMMARY OF ACTION ITEMS
The Task Force agreed that all Federal employees should have access to government-
wide electronic mail and directed the Applications and Technology Committee (through
GITS) to report to the IITF in January on the progress made.
The Task Force directed the Applications and Technology Committee to report in January
on the inventory of all agencies' current and planned activities to promote the NII. If an
agency has not done so, it should report to the Applications and Technology Committee
by December 27th on its NII-related efforts, including how each agency will use
networking and computer technology to "reinvent government."
3
The Task Force approved the charters and workplans of the Task Force's
Telecommunications Policy, Applications and Technology, and Information Technology
Committees.
ADJOURNMENT
The IITF will meet again on Friday, January 21, 1994, at 10:00 a.m. (the location to be
announced). Secretary Brown adjourned the meeting.
ATTENDEES:
Vice President Al Gore
Secretary Ronald H. Brown
Kathy Aterno, EPA
David Barram, DOC
Walter Broadnax, HHS
James Baker, NOAA
Anne Bingaman, DOJ
Wally Beyer, USDA
Dick Beaird, State
Mel Ciment, NSF
Michele Farquhar, DOC
Jim Flyzik, Treasury
Brian Fontes, FCC
Cita Furlani, DOC
Jack Gibbons, OSTP
Dan Golden, NASA
Carol Hamilton, DOC
Sally Ann Harper, EPA
Michael Huerta, DOT
Richard Hernandez, SBA
Jim Huff, USDA
Larry Irving, DOC
Skip Johns, OSTP
Roger Johnson, GSA
Anita Jones, DOD
Sally Katzen, OMB
Tom Kalil, NEC
Charles Kalina, NCO
Debra Knopman, DOI
Neal Lane, NSF
Bob Litan, DOJ
David Lytel, OSTP
Bruce McConnell, OMB
Denise Michel, DOC
Alicia Munnell, Treasury
4
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
003. minutes
re: NIITF meeting [partial] (1 page)
10/17/1993
P3/b(3)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Council of Economic Advisers
Stiglitz, Joseph
OA/Box Number: 9563
FOLDER TITLE:
Telecommuncations - NII (National Information Infrastructure) [2]
2019-0203-F
jm2837
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - |44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
Ed Murphy, Treasury
Dave Nelson, DOE
Mike Nelson, OSTP
Emmett Paige, DOD
Bob Pepper, FCC
Rob Portman, Labor
Linda Roberts, DOEducation
Jonathan Sallet, DOC
Greg Simon, OVP
(b)(3)
[ 003]
Robert Stein, DOC
Joe Stiglitz, CEA
Tom Sugrue, NTIA, DOC
Jane Wales, OSTP
5
THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S
INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE TASK FORCE
Chair: Ronald H. Brown, Secretary of Commerce
Public Minutes of October 27, 1993, Meeting
TIME AND PLACE: 1:00 p.m. Vice President's Ceremonial Office,
Old Executive Office Building
PURPOSE: To demonstrate a broad commitment to the Administration's goals outlined in The
National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action and to achieve consensus on an
ambitious and productive workplan for the Task Force.
SUMMARY OF TASK FORCE ACTIONS
Agreed that all federal employees should have access to government-wide electronic mail
and directed the Applications and Technology Committee (previously called the
"Applications Committee") (through its Government Information Technology Services
Working Group) to report to the IITF in January on its progress. To assist in this effort,
the inter-agency Electronic Mail Task Force will launch a survey to gather baseline
statistics on agency connectivity.
Directed the Applications and Technology Committee to report to the Task Force in
January with an inventory of all agencies' current and planned activities to promote the
NII. Agencies are required to report to the Applications and Technology Committee by
December 27 on NII-related efforts, including how each agency will use networking and
computer technology to "reinvent government."
Approved the charters and workplans of the Task Force's Committees -
Telecommunications Policy, Applications and Technology, and Information Technology.
The Committees and their working groups are summarized below.
IITF COMMITTEE CHARTERS AND WORKPLANS
The Telecommunications Policy Committee, chaired by Larry Irving, Assistant Secretary of
Commerce for Communication and Information and Administrator, National Telecommunications
and Information Administration, will formulate consistent Administration positions on key
telecommunications and infrastructure issues. Two working groups report to the
Telecommunications Policy Committee: the Universal Service Working Group, chaired by Larry
Irving, and the International Telecommunications Policy Working Group, chaired by Carol Darr,
Deputy General Counsel of the Department of Commerce. The Universal Service Working
Group will work to ensure that all Americans have access to and enjoy the benefits of the NII.
The International Telecommunications Policy Working Group will examine telecommunications
issues in an international context.
The Information Policy Committee is addressing critical information policy issues and has three
working groups: Intellectual Property Rights, Privacy, and Government Information. The
Information Policy Committee is chaired by Sally Katzen, Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
The Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights is chaired by Bruce Lehman, Assistant
Secretary of Patents and Trademark of the Department of Commerce. It will develop proposals
for protecting copyrights and other intellectual property rights in an electronic world.
The Working Group on Privacy is headed by Pat Faley, Acting Director of the Office of
Consumer Affairs, Department of Health and Human Services. This group will design
Administration policies to protect individual privacy despite the rapid increase in the collection,
storage and dissemination of personal data in electronic form.
The Working Group on Government Information is chaired by Bruce McConnell, Chief of OMB's
Information Policy Branch, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. This group focuses on
ways to promote the dissemination of personal data in electronic form.
The Applications and Technology Committee is coordinating the Administration's efforts to
develop, demonstrate, and promote applications of information technology in manufacturing,
education, health care, government services, libraries, and other social services. Arati Prabhakar,
Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, chairs the Committee. Reporting
to the Applications and Technology Committee is the newly created Government Information
Technology Services (GITS) Working Group which is chaired by James Flyzik, Director of
Telecommunications Management for the Department of the Treasury. The purpose of the GITS
Working Group is to oversee the implementation of the National Performance Review
recommendations on technology. In addition, it will work in conjunction with OMB and the
General Services Administration to establish procurement and implementation policies designed
to improve productivity and reduce costs.
ISSUES DISCUSSED
Electronic filing of FCC licenses
Electronic conferencing for procurement and small business
Computer security
Mechanisms of software licensing
Fair information practices and principles
Dissemination of government information
Private sector outreach
These discussions will be expanded within the Task Force structure.
2
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
004. minutes
re: NIITF meeting [partial] (1 page)
10/27/1993
P3/b(3)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Council of Economic Advisers
Stiglitz, Joseph
OA/Box Number: 9563
FOLDER TITLE:
Telecommuncations - NII (National Information Infrastructure) [2]
2019-0203-F
jm2837
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - |44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
ATTENDEES:
Vice President Al Gore
Secretary Ronald H. Brown
Kathy Aterno, EPA
David Barram, DOC
Walter Broadnax, HHS
James Baker, DOC
Anne Bingaman, DOJ
Wally Beyer, USDA
Dick Beaird, DOS
Mel Ciment, NSF
Michele Farquhar, DOC
Jim Flyzik, Treasury
Brian Fontes, FCC
Cita Furlani, DOC
Jack Gibbons, OSTP
Dan Golden, NASA
Carol Hamilton, DOC
Sally Ann Harper, EPA
Michael Huerta, DOT
Richard Hernandez, SBA
Jim Huff, USDA
Larry Irving, DOC
Skip Johns, OSTP
Roger Johnson, GSA
Anita Jones, DOD
Sally Katzen, OMB
Tom Kalil, NEC
Charles Kalina, NCO
Debra Knopman, DOI
Neal Lane, NSF
Bob Litan, DOJ
David Lytel, OSTP
Bruce McConnell, OMB
Denise Michel, DOC
Alicia Munnell, Treasury
Ed Murphy, Treasury
Dave Nelson, DOE
Mike Nelson, OSTP
Emmett Paige, DOD
Bob Pepper, FCC
Rob Portman, DOL
Linda Roberts, DOEducation
Jonathan Sallet, DOC
Greg Simon, OVP
(b)(3)
[004]
Robert Stein, DOC
3
Joe Stiglitz, CEA
Tom Sugrue, DOC
Jane Wales, OSTP
:
4
11/22/93
12:39
202 482 1635
Telcrelecommuni
NII
NTIA
5.
001/009
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
The Assistant Secretary for Communications
and Information
UNITED STATES of AMERICA
Washington, D.C. 20230
com
November 22, 1993
Boken
MEMORANDUM FOR
Commerce:
Jonathan Sallet
Justice:
Ann Bingaman, Bob Litan
CEA:
Joe Stiglitz, Jonathan Baker
Leg. Affairs:
Tracy Thornton
OMB:
Chris Edley, Jonas Neihardt, Sally Katzen
NEC:
Tom Kalil
OSTP:
Mike Nelson
OVP:
Greg Simon
FCC:
Bob Pepper, Renee Licht
FROM:
Larry Irving fl
SUBJECT: Meeting of NII Legislative Working Group
The second meeting of the NII Legislative Working Group will
be held on Monday, November 22nd from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. in
Room 230 of the Old Executive Office Building.
Attached are two handouts for the session:
- A list of telecommunications and information policy
thinkers/academics/economists
- A side-by-side comparison of provisions of S.1086 and the
Markey Bill
Notebooks will be provided at the meeting.
Attachment
11/22/93
12:40
202 482 1635
NTIA
5.
002/009
Telecommunications and Information Policy:
Thinkers/Academics/Economists
George Gilder
Peter Huber, Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute
Nicholas Negroponte, MIT Media Lab
Henry Geller, Markle Foundation
Eli Noam, Columbia Institute for Telecommunications
Robert Crandall, Brookings Institute
Dale Hatfield, Hatfield and Associates
Russell Newman, Tufts University
Roger Noll, Stanford Economics Dept.
Christopher Sterling, George Washington University
Heather Hudson, University of San Francisco
Allen Hammond, New York Law School
Charles Firestone, The Aspen Institute
Stanley Besen, Charles River Associates
Lewis Branscomb, Kennedy School, Harvard University
Vincent Cerf, President, Internet Society
Michael Dertouzos, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
Craig Fields, CEO, MCTC
Henry Perritt, Villanova Law School
Charles McClure, Syracuse University
Prof. Brian Kahin, Kennedy School, Harvard University
Mitchell Kapor, Electronic Frontier Foundation
Robert Kahn, Corporation for National Research Initiatives
11/22/93 12:40
202 482 1635
NTIA
5
003/009
2
Made Presentations at OMB's NII session, 10/14/93:
Academics:
Henry Geller
Christopher Sterling
Henry Perritt
Robert Kahn
Michael Dertouzos
Public Interest:
Jeff Chester
Richard Civille
Jerry Berman
Nancy Milio
Industry:
Gerry Brock
Ken Kay
Stephanie Biddle
Thomas Wheeler
11/22/93
12:40
202 482 1635
NTIA
1
004/009
PROVISIONS OF S. 1086 AND 11/18/93 DRAFT MARKET BILL
RELATING TO MAJOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS ISSUES
Issue
S. 1086
Draft Markey Bill
Resolved Issues
1. Telco/Cable
Allows telcos to provide video in
Allows telcos to provide video in
Crossownership
their telephone service areas,
their telephone service areas,
subject to safeguards. § 8
subject to safeguards. § 201
To provide video services,
To provide video services, telco
telco must (1) form separate
must (1) form separate affiliate
subsidiaries (defined in detail by
(defined in detail in § 201)
§ 11), and (2) file tariffs
(Joint inbound telemarketing
giving other programmers
permitted), and (2) establish a
nondiscriminatory access to telco
"video platform" (the "basic"
facilities and functions.
video dialtone service described
in FCC's 1992 Cable/Telco
Order).
Telco may not provide video in
Telco may not "purchase or
partnership with or by acquiring
otherwise obtain control over"
more than 5% of a cable system
any cable system in telcos's
in the telco's serving area.
serving area. Exceptions for
rural areas, areas where cable
system serves less than 10% of
households, and limited use of
cable "drop wire." Waivers
permitted.
No comparable provision.
Telco may be required to
reserve up to 75% of the
capacity of its "video platform"
for unaffiliated video providers.
Restriction sunsets in 5 years.
Foregoing restrictions do not
Foregoing restrictions do not
apply in "rural" areas, as defined
apply in "rural" areas (defined
by FCC rules in effect when bill is
by the bill to encompass areas
enacted.
with 10,000 or fewer people).
Cable companies must provide
The FCC may waive the
telecommunications services
structural separation
through a separate subsidiary.
requirements for small and rural
telcos and, after 5 years, may
grant relief to any carrier.
Cable Act's franchising, rate
regulation, and access to
programming provisions don't
apply to telco's video platform.
11/22/93 12:40
202 482 1635
NTIA
1
005/009
2
S. 1086
Draft Markey Bill
2. Local Competition/
FCC regulations must require any
Local exchange carriers must
Interconnection
"telecommunications carrier"
offer on a tariffed basis,
(defined in § 4(kk), (jj)) to afford
pursuant to FCC regulations, (1)
telecommunications and
equal access and
information service providers (1)
interconnection to other telecom
interconnection to the carrier's
providers at any "technically
network at "any technically
feasible and economically
feasible point," (2)
reasonable point" in network.
nondiscriminatory access to
(Actual collocation preferred
network facilities, information,
over virtual), and (2) unbundled
and functions, and (3) access to
features, functions, and
network services and functions
capabilities. § 102
without restrictions on resale or
shared use. § 5.
Joint Board must be convened
to consider equal access and
FCC regulations shall ensure that
interconnection regulations.
(1) number portability is made
available when technically feasible
Users of equal access services
(2) an impartial entity administers
must bear their costs.
the telephone numbering plan.
Resale of local service shall not
be prohibited by the FCC,
states, or carriers.
FCC may modify these
requirements for any local
exchange carrier with fewer
than 500,000 access lines.
Rural exchange carriers need not
provide equal access and
interconnection to other local
exchange carriers. §102
FCC and states may give carriers
FCC must establish criteria for
pricing flexibility for services the
determining (1) when services
FCC finds are competitive. § 5
are subject to competition and
(2) flexible pricing procedures
that replace tariff filings. FCC
and states will then apply those
criteria to relax regulation,
where appropriate upon carrier
request. § 102
11/22/93 12:41
202 482 1635
NTIA
1
006/009
3
S. 1086
Draft Markey Bill
3. Preemption
One year after enactment, states
One year after enactment,
may not "prohibit or limit in a
state/local governments may
manner inconsistent with" Federal
not (1) "effectively prohibit"
law any entity from providing
anyone from providing telecom
inter- or intrastate
services or impose entry
telecommunications service. § 5
restrictions inconsistent with
those in the bill, (2) prohibit or
States may not regulate
restrict any entity from
information services (except for
exercising the equal access/
cable). § 13
interconnection rights provided
by the bill. $ 102 (As noted
above, resale should not be
prohibited).
11/22/93 12:41
202 482 1635
NTIA
1
007/009
4
S. 1086
Draft Markey Bill
4. Universal Service
States, in coordination with FCC,
FCC must convene a Joint
shall ensure the preservation and
Board to develop
advancement of universal service.
recommendations to preserve
§ 5
universal service. § 102
All telecommunications carriers
All telecommunications service
must contribute to the
providers must make "equitable
preservation and advancement of
and nondiscriminatory"
universal service. § 5
contributions to preserving
universal service.
State regulators must ensure that
To assist the Joint Board, the
telecommunications carriers
FCC and the states must
provide rural and noncompetitive
develop a plan (1) defining "the
markets with "access to high
nature and extent of the
quality telecommunications
services" encompassed within
network facilities and
universal service (including
capabilities." The FCC may step
"advanced telecommunications
in if the states fail to do so. § 6
services") and (2) establishing
"specific and predictable"
support mechanisms. § 102
The FCC and the states shall
FCC must adopt regulations to
ensure that advances in network
ensure that advances in network
capabilities and services "are
capabilities and services "are
designed to be accessible by" the
designed to be accessible by"
disabled. § 6
the disabled. § 102
Construction permits shall
address the means by which
construction or extension will
meet network access needs of
the disabled.
After an inquiry, the FCC shall
adopt regulations to promote
the availability of "open
platform services" (as defined in
§ 101) at reasonable rates. §
102
5. Forbearance/
FCC may exempt carriers without
No comparable provision.
Deregulation
market power from filing tariffs.
§ 5
Pricing flexibility as described in
Pricing flexibility as described in
Issue 2.
Issue 2.
11/22/93 12:41
202 482 1635
NTIA
1
008/009
5
Unresolved Issues
S. 1086
Draft Markey Bill
6. Information
Bell companies may provide
No comparable provision.
Services
information services only through
a fully separate subsidiary. § 11
Where a Bell company provides an
No comparable provision.
information gateway service (as
defined in § 11), it must provide
that service to subscribers and
information service providers on
nondiscriminatory rates, terms,
and conditions. § 11
7. Long Distance
Permits Bell companies to provide
No comparable provisions.
limited interLATA services in
conjunction with cable television
services and cellular radio. §§ 9,
10
8. Manufacturing
No provision.
No provision.
9. Open Access
No provision other than as noted
No provision.
in Issue 6.
10. CPE & Bundling
No provision.
No provision.
11. Customer
CPNI disclosure by all
No provision.
Proprietary
telecommunications carriers is
Network
controlled by customer; notice to
Information
FCC if aggregate CPNI disclosed,
(CPNI)
and it must then be available to
other service providers. § 12
Local telcos must make available
subscriber list information, but
subscribers may prohibit or limit
disclosure. § 12
12. Enterprise Zones
No provision.
No provision.
13. Ameritech/
No provision.
No provision.
Rochester Plans
Not For This Year
14. General Privacy
No provision.
No provision.
Issues
11/22/93 12:41
202 482 1635
NTIA
5
009/009
6
S. 1086
Draft Markey Bill
15. Network
Not mentioned at length.
Addressed at more length.
Reliability
Findings indicate competition
Common carriers must comply
should promote network reliability
with FCC regulations concerning
through redundancy. § 2(8)
network reliability and quality.
$ 102
One purpose of the bill is to
promote reliable network
FCC must establish measures or
capabilities. § 3(6)
benchmarks and process to
monitor network reliability and
quality. § 102
16. Broadcast/
No provision.
No Provision.
Newspaper
Crossownership
17. General FCC
No provision.
FCC to expedite review of
Reform
Section 201(c) complaints on
equal access (openness and
accessibility). § 103
FCC to expedite licensing of
new technologies and services.
§ 104
18. International
None, but regulations on
Same.
Issues
telecommunications services
would encompass such U.S.-
overseas offerings.
19. Foreign
FCC retains present authority to
No provision.
Ownership
regulate entry of foreign entities;
foreign entities that would be
newly subject to common carrier
regulation grandfathered under
Section 310(b) as of given date.
§ 5
Some General Observations
The draft Markey bill is more specific about the contents of FCC regulations.
The draft Markey bill specifies 12 separate deadlines for FCC or joint FCC/state action. The
bill also requires the FCC to undertake at least 6 studies or congressional reports. In contrast,
the only deadline in S. 1086 pertains to FCC regulations implementing the bill's local
competition/interconnection provisions.
Both S. 1086 and draft Markey bill attempt to knit together existing regulatory schemes for
common carriers and cable firms without completely overhauling the Communications Act.
11/22/93 12:57
202 482 4191
POLICY OFFICE
1
001/005
Telecommunications - NII
DATE:
November 22, 1993
5 pages - Please deliver immediately
FAX TO:
Justice:
Ann Bingaman, Bob Litan
CEA:
Joe Stiglitz, Jonathan Baker
Leg. Affairs:
Tracy Thornton
OMB:
Chris Edley, Jonas Niehardt, Sally Katzen
OSTP:
Mike Nelson
OVP:
Greg Simon
FCC:
Bob Pepper, Rene Lecht
NEC:
Tom Kalil
FROM:
Department of Commerce
SUBJECT:
Attached is a memo for discussion at this afternoon's NII Legislative Working
Group meeting.
11/22/93 12:58
202 482 4191
POLICY OFFICE
5.
002/005
November 19, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO:
NII Legislative Working Group
SUBJECT:
NII LEGISLATION - ANALYTIC FRAMEWORK
We face the task of resolving issues that are currently unresolved and, in addition,
considering how the specific resolution of issues will translate into the working of an information
marketplace in the coming years.
Our working list of unresolved issues now include:
The conditions under which the Bell Companies should be permitted to offer
information services -- in particular, whether a separate subsidiary requirement
should be imposed on some or all such offerings.
Whether and on what terms to permit the Bell Companies to provide long distance
services.
To what degree the Bell Companies should be permitted to manufacture
telecommunications equipment, and engage in product-related research and
development now prohibited by the divestiture decree.
Whether specific regulatory mechanisms should be established to ensure that
information providers and programmers have nondiscriminatory access to the
networks of cable companies and telephone companies.
The specific ways to expand the universal service goal and to develop new funding
mechanisms for it.
Consideration of the unresolved policy issues requires that the Administration be able to
describe the structures of the present and future, information marketplace. This memorandum
posits a number of inquiries that should be considered when policy options are proposed.
The issues described above are unresolved because the "preferable" policy outcome is not
clear. In the end, choosing positions on them will require not only careful factual, economic, and
legal analysis, but also subjective judgments on a host of questions -- e.g., the market effect of
potential competition, the point at which incipient entry becomes "effective" competition, the
efficacy and costs (both direct and indirect) of government regulation -- on which reasonable minds
can, and do, differ.
At our last drafting session, we also noted the importance of running all of the decisions on
particular legislative positions through a screen that would consider the long-term implications of
each proposed Administration policy. The same analytical issues that will help to resolve
outstanding issues will help us to "screen" the legislation as a whole:
11/22/93 12:58
202 482 4191
POLICY OFFICE
5.
003/005
1. Dynamic Nature of Information Industries
Virtually everyone agrees that information industries - which now include computers,
telecommunications, mass media, and entertainment -- are characterized by rapid, almost
continuous change. In large part, this is a product of continuing technological progress - advances
in electronic and optical technologies improve performance, decrease costs, and make possible new
services and capabilities. Such changes also make new entry feasible into markets traditionally
characterized by monopoly. Indeed, the often-made statement that once-separate information
industries, such as cable television and telephony, are "converging" reflects in part the fact that it is
increasingly possible for providers of traditionally distinct services to enter each other's markets at
relatively low cost.
Administration review should include a thorough examination of the economic functions that
will be performed in a unified information marketplace including the near-term dynamics of
convergence of diverse sectors into one, which includes a careful analysis of market power and
competitive advantage bestowed by governmental regulation as it may exist over the next five-to-
ten years.
Analysis must go beyond the present dimensions of product markets to examine the basic
configuration of economic functions that will exist in an integrated information marketplace. These
economic functions can be grouped into four broad categories:
Information appliances (including hardware, like a television or computer),
Information conduits (including infrastructure, like networks and switches),
Information providers (including software producers), and
Information consumers (including individuals and businesses).
The dynamic nature of these industries has several crucial implications for government
policymakers:
Government policies and structures -- particularly regulation - must continually be
scrutinized to determine whether they are compatible with current market
conditions. Rationales for specific restrictions could be undermined rather quickly by
changing market and technological conditions.
Regulatory policies must be conducive to innovation and efficient investment on the
part of regulated firms, consistent with the overarching need to protect customers
and competition. They should also recognize the competitive potential created by
new information technologies.
Regulation must be flexible enough to keep pace with marketplace changes. The
legislative process might not be well-suited to providing such flexibility. One
approach would be for legislation to state general policy goals, but to leave the task
of crafting specific regulations to expert administrative agencies -- such as the FCC.
2. Government Action vis-a-vis the Information Industry
Among the basic goals supporting governmental action is economic growth - and with it
aspects of competition policy.
2
11/22/93
12:59
202 482 4191
POLICY OFFICE
5.
004/005
For obvious reasons, much of the emphasis here is focused on the operation of the local
telecommunications market. Principally the province of telcos and cable, other competitors are, or
will be, entering the local market: cellular, satellites delivering video on demand, PCS, to name but
a few. But, in the near term, the prospect of a telco-cable duopoly raises the critical questions of
government involvement.
Government policy will be needed in the near term to determine the shape of such
competition - considering both customer demands and desires of the information providers to have
access to customer demands.
These important related issues should be noted:
1) The Local Loop Might Not Remain a Single Entity: The "local loop" may become a series
of loop-ettes, each with more competition than the local loop as a whole. For example, will
a telco that is the only full-service provider in a local loop face competition in the delivery of
local telephony from a series of wireless providers? The answer to that question may have
implications for the analysis of market power in the local loop.
2) The Asymmetries of Regulatory Policy: It is entirely appropriate, under some conditions,
to treat firms or industries differently for regulatory purposes. However, asymmetric
regulation can also cause significant market distortions, by prompting firm behavior that
inefficiently seeks to take advantage of such asymmetry, by encouraging inefficient entry,
or by giving certain firms an unfair and unwarranted advantage in the marketplace. As a
result, government must continually reexamine its rationale for subjecting certain firms to
regulatory requirements not borne by their rivals. Where differential treatment is no longer
warranted by marketplace conditions, it should be adjusted or eliminated promptly.
3) Promotion of Universal Service: Economic issues also include aspects of universal
service and the obvious question: Who pays? Any government action designed to permit
rapid expansion of the information marketplace must be measured to ascertain whether it
causes imbalance or other unforeseen effects in the current - or future - universal service
system. Although definitions of what comprises the information industry differ, it is clear
that government involvement varies dramatically among the more easily identifiable sectors
of the industry - e.g., computer hardware and software, telephony, and mass media. For
example, the computer industry (equipment and software), with 1992 revenues of
approximately $60 billion, is essentially unregulated, as are the $7.6 billion consumer
electronics industry, the $8.4 billion recorded music industry, and an approximately $6
billion video game industry. In contrast, cable television companies (1992 revenues of
$21.7 billion) and local exchange telephone companies (1992 revenues of $94.7 billion) are
subject to extensive price and service regulation by federal and state authorities.
This memorandum focuses on the economic growth agenda for illustrative purposes only.
Equally important goals, such as universal service and questions of access and intervention, must
be subject to a similar analysis.
3. Government Regulation - Costs and Benefits
The Administration must consider carefully the use of different mechanisms for action.
Three important subsidiary issues are included in this inquiry (i) what forms of regulation,
considered as part of a unified model, will best achieve governmental goals, (ii) how would such a
model work in a federalist system, and (iii) how should responsibility be allocated among the
branches of the federal government.
3
11/22/93
12:59
202 482 4191
POLICY OFFICE
1
005/005
1) Models of Regulation: The manner in which government chooses to implement its
intervention should not be treated as an after-thought. One example arises from the discussion of
near-term competition in local telecommunications markets. Some urge that local providers (or at
least providers with demonstrable market power) be treated as common carriers. Others, more
usually from a computer perspective, emphasize open architecture and interconnection. But no
definitive judgment has yet to be reached as to the manner in which common carrier-like
obligations, in this context, would actually differ from open architecture demands.
One assumes that common carrier-like obligations include, at a minimum, an access
requirement and some form of price restraint. But they could also include more, such as aspects of
universal service goals. These could include questions of which services are made available to
which consumers through what means and over what timeframe. The placement of such
obligations also requires a careful analysis of whether governmental regulation may be posing a
barrier to competition.
In the effort to protect consumers and competition, one must remember that government
regulation imposes costs on both regulated firms (and, indirectly, their customers) and society as a
whole. Moreover, the direct costs (e.g., expenses incurred in filing tariffs, conducting rate cases,
complying with conditions and safeguards) may be a small part of the total picture. Regulation can
also impose substantial indirect costs by, for example, suppressing competition or depressing
investment and innovation. Thus, although rate of return regulation may have prevented carriers
from charging rates that exceeded relevant costs, it provided few incentives for firms to reduce
their costs or to respond efficiently to customer demand or changing technologies. As a result,
some suggest that prices tend to be higher, and the introduction of new services slower, in rate of
return regulated monopoly markets than in competitive markets, even where rate regulation
effectively constrains the monopolists' profits.
2) Federal, State and Local Regulation: It is critically important, at the outset, to remember
that a great deal of governmental regulation of information markets exists below the federal level --
most notably, state regulation of local telephone service and local regulation of cable television.
The creation of a unified model of governmental regulation must, therefore, take special cognizance
of the federalism issues inherent in the creation of a new regulatory structure.
3) The Allocation of Federal Responsibility: Much of the discussion on this point revolves
around the debate between legislative specificity and administrative discretion. But the point is
scarcely technical. For example, the Cable Act of 1992 defines competition in order to affect
certain obligations of cable companies. Criticism of the use of very precise definitions have been
mounting, as some observers argue that micro-written legislative definitions are ill-suited to
changing markets or unforeseen events. Thus, it is important, at every stage, to consider the
manner in which discretion is given to administrative agencies.
4
Telh NII
CLOSE HOLD
COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY ISSUE BRIEFING
Nil
LDT
Prepared by the Vice President's Domestic Policy Office
JES
Tuesday, November 16, 1993
JS
Table of Contents
JB
TO'D
On The Hill
2
Cable Act
2
Cable - Telco
3
Long Distance
4
Wireless
4
Privacy/Encryption
6
Government Communication
8
Other Technology
9
The Vice President Only Section
11
THE FUTURE OF INTERACTIVE TV
STAYSKAY
ON THE HILL
CLOSE HOLD
BROOKS MEETS TO TALK ABOUT LONG DISTANCE
Chief executives of several long distance companies, including AT&T Chairman
Robert Allen, MCI Chairman Bert Roberts, LDDS/Metromedia Chairman Bernard
Ebbers and smaller companies met the week before last with Chairman Brooks to talk
about MFJ legislation. There were conflicting reports about the meeting, with some
industry representatives believing that Brooks obliquely promised to protect long
distance competition, while others said he's backing off from strong protections for
regional Bell entry into long distance. Most of the meeting was taken up by Brooks'
discussion of other issues, particularly NAFTA.
BROOKS SENDS LETTER ON ANTI-TRUST
In a November 4 letter to Anne Bingaman and FTC Chairman Janet Steiger, Chairman
Brooks issued a stern warning against ignoring antitrust laws in the new wave of
media megamergers. Brooks warned that "there would be much regret later if the
highway turned out to be a turnpike where small and midsized vehicular traffic is
forced to pull to the side of the road to make way for a few, giant companies -- or
even to be refused entry at the toll booth entirely."
CABLE ACT
CABLE RATE FREEZE EXTENDED:
The Federal Communications Commission extended a freeze on cable television rates
until February 15. It is also stepping up enforcement of the Cable Act. The FCC
planned to mail about 30 letters last week demanding that cable companies justify
changes in rates since new regulations kicked in Sept. 1.
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS DROP BALL ON CABLE:
Some say that local governments are partly to blame for high cable bills. The 1992
cable law gave counties, cities and towns the power to regulate cable rates, but only if
they ask for it. Since the law kicked in on September 1, only 3,425 of 11,000 local
franchising authorities have sought certification from the FCC.
CLOSE HOLD
CABLE - TELCO
AMERITECH FILES SUIT:
Ameritech filed suit in Illinois and Michigan U.S. district courts November 1st to
overturn the cable-telco cross ownership ban. The recent Bell Atlantic case applies
only to Bell Atlantic in its region. Other phone companies are expected to file similar
suits.
Us WEST CHALLENGES TELCO CABLE BAN TOO
US West has also joined the list of those trying to overturn the telco-cable
cross-ownership ban, filing a suit in U.S. District. Court, Seattle, against the FCC, the
U.S. government, and the Justice Dept. U S West selected Seattle for the suit because
that's where it expects significant competition. U S West indicated it would build a
video dial tone system in the Seattle area if allowed, including video-on-demand and
capacity for other programmers.
PACIFIC BELL TO SPEND $16 BILLION ON "INFORMATION HIGHWAY"
Pacific Bell announced last week that it will spend $16 billion over the next seven
years to accelerate development of its portion of the information superhighway. The
announcement represents one of the biggest commitments by one of the regional Bell
companies. Pacific Telesis Group, the parent of Pacific Bell, has been reported as
exploring alliances with cable companies in recent months, particularly following the
Bell Atlantic/TCI announcement. But last week's announcement means that Pacific
Telesis has decided to act on its own rather than copying the several other Baby Bells
that have linked up with cable operators.
AT&T GETS $5 BILLION DEAL:
AT&T struck a $5 billion deal with Pacific Telesis to build and service the
telecommunication transmission network for Pacific Telesis. It's the biggest
equipment contract in AT&T's history. The deal also may show that local
phone companies will buy equipment from AT&T despite AT&T's pending
acquisition of McCaw Cellular. In addition, it could put AT&T back in the
local phone business.
CLOSE HOLD
LONG DISTANCE
BELLSOUTH PETITIONS FCC FOR LONG DISTANCE:
BellSouth petitioned the FCC to enter the long-distance market if the merger between
AT&T and McCaw Cellular Communications is approved. It wants the FCC to
impose restrictions on AT&T's cellular operations until the Bell companies can enter
the long-distance businesses. Most of the regional Bell companies charge that the
McCaw deal gets AT&T back into the local phone system business a charge AT&T
denies. The regional Bells charge that AT&T has, through mergers, succeeded in
overthrowing the 1982 decree breaking up the old Bell System, and it is time to scrap
the restrictions. Failure to do that, they charge, gives AT&T a competitive advantage.
The regional Bells condition the AT&T McCaw merger on: (1) an AT&T agreement
to submit an "unequivocal, irrevocable letter" to the Commission that it wouldn't
object to MFJ relief for the regional Bells. (2) Imposition of restrictions and
obligations comparable to those imposed on regional Bells until MFJ relief is obtained.
AT&T's counters that the Bells should not be allowed into long distance until there is
real, meaningful competition in local service. It defines such competition strictly,
saying 75 percent of local customers should have choices on local phone service and
30 percent should have exercised that choice.
COMTEL PROPOSES TOUGHER LONG DISTANCE TEST THAN AT&T
The Competitive Telecommunications Association (CompTel) proposed an even stiffer
test for regional Bells to be allowed into long distance services than did AT&T. In
comments to the Senate Commerce Committee, CompTel raised the bar even higher,
while adding an element of widespread coverage throughout regional Bell service
territory. CompTel said that 75% of local customers in 90% of the exchange areas
served by the regional Bells should be able to receive the alternative service. Under
the Comptel plan, 50% of customers would have to subscribe to the service from the
alternative carrier for there to be effective competition.
WIRELESS
SIMON Is UNVEILED:
IBM and BellSouth have now unveiled the newest take on the personal digital
assistant concept. The device, called Simon, is more of a superpowered cellular
phone. Other entries in the fledgling PDA market are more like computers with
communications capabilities tacked on. Instead of buttons, Simon is touch sensitive
it has a touch-sensitive screen embedded in the handle. One screen lets Simon operate
CLOSE HOLD
like an ordinary cellular phone - to dial, just touch on-screen images of the phone
keypad buttons. Another lets a user write a note on it using a special stylus, then fax
the note right from the phone. Another screen lets Simon send or receive electronic
mail. Simon will retail for about $1000.
PACTEL CELLULAR CHOOSES CDMA FOR 1995 LAUNCH
PacTel Cellular, an Industry leader, made the strategic decision to bypass
first-generation technology; and opt instead for a superior technology offering longer-
term solutions. Years of testing and review have convinced PacTel Cellular Corp. that
its customers will be best served if the conversion to digital technology awaits the
commercial introduction of the most advanced digital cellular technology available:
Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA).
Digital Cellular Technology
Many cellular carriers are currently choosing between two forms of digital technology
-- CDMA and TDMA. After evaluating both technologies, PacTel Cellular chose
CDMA because of its belief that the benefits it will provide -- including clearer calls,
fewer busy signals, greater privacy and fewer dropped calls -- are superior to those of
Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA). CDMA is based on technology developed
to provide secure communications for the military. Its signal is highly resistant to
interface, restricts eavesdropping and is expected to offer at least ten-times current
capacity of analog communications. While other carriers are opting to introduce
TDMA equipment this year, PacTel Cellular will wait until testing and refinement of
the more advanced CDMA is complete before making the switch from analog to
digital.
NEXTEL CREATES NATION'S LARGEST ALL-DIGITAL WIRELESS NETWORK
Nextel Communications Inc. announced that it has created the nation's largest wireless
network capable of offering advanced, all-digital integrated communications -- the
wireless portion of an information superhighway. When fully constructed in 1995,
Nextel's owned networks will be able to reach 180 million people across the United
States Nextel is acquiring licenses for more than 2,500 radio frequencies in 21 states
from Motorola Inc. in exchange for a 20 percent stake in Nextel. This third wireless
phone service is helped along by a $1.8 billion deal between Motorola and Nextel
Communications. The service will work like today's cellular phones. Consumers will
be able to choose between two local cellular companies and this new service for
wireless phones.
ANALYSIS
This third wireless phone service should whip wireless competition into a frenzy. It
will drive down prices and force existing cellular companies to improve service even
before the new networks are completed, around 1996. The deal between Nextel and
Motorola means Nextel now can build wireless phone networks in 45 of the USA's 50
largest cities, in effect giving Nextel access to three times more customers than the
CLOSE HOLD
largest cellular company, McCaw Cellular Communications. The new service will
work over radio frequencies now used for things such as taxi dispatches. Nextel will
offer its service throughout California by March 1994; and nationwide by 1996. It has
to make that schedule to beat personal communication networks to the market. PCN,
a wireless service cheaper than cellular, will be ready in 1996-'97.
OTA TO STUDY WIRELESS ROLE IN NII
House Science Committee Chairman George Brown and Science Subcommittee
Chairman Boucher have asked OTA to conduct a study on the role of wireless
communications technology in the national information infrastructure. Preliminary
results could be available at beginning of next year, and form basis for hearings after
that. Among questions they want OTA to answer are:
What effects should convergence of wireline and wireless have on regulation
and information services?
How can wireless technologies enhance diversity of communications and
services?
What are policy options for making certain that wireless technologies are part
of information infrastructure?
PRIVACY/ENCRYPTION
HILL TACKLES PRIVACY CONCERNS
A rash of privacy-related concerns has broken out on Capitol Hill, as legislators have
begun to examine the effects of sophisticated technology on international business,
medical records, and consumer information.
In short
Chairman Brooks released a GAO report on communications privacy and
encryption technology.
The House Government Information Subcommittee held a hearing on protecting
privacy in computerized medical information, releasing the Office of
Technology Assessment (OTA) report on the issue.
Chairman Markey, as expected, introduced HR-3432 setting limits on the use of
customer information generated by telephone billing systems and setting a
per-call standard for Caller ID.
CLOSE HOLD
Gao REPORT ON ENCRYPTION
The GAO report that Brroks released, Communications Privacy: Policy and Actions,
deals with the commercial aspects of privacy as a product, and criticized the
government policy that has stifled export of encryption software that can be used to
protect information. The GAO report concluded that increased use of computer and
communications networks, computer literacy and dependence on information
technology heighten U.S. industry's risk of losing proprietary information to economic
espionage. To combat that threat, industry is turning to software and hardware with
encryption capabilities, but GAO's review of government policies found that national
security and law enforcement concerns were hindering development, use and export of
those products.
While U.S. manufacturers are being kept back by government policies, however,
foreign producers of encryption software and devices are freer to make sales, the GAO
report said. Brooks commented: "It is deeply disturbing to find that some U.S.
government agencies are undermining American corporations' efforts to protect
themselves from state-sponsored theft of trade secrets and other proprietary
information." The GAO portrayed the government as fraught with confusion as NSA
and NIST compete to develop encryption standards, and State and Commerce uneasily
share jurisdiction over export licensing, with different standards. The GAO also
criticized agencies for leaving the public out of development of encryption standards.
MEDICAL PRIVACY
In the medical area, OTA released a report, Protecting Privacy in Computerized
Medical Information, that analyzed the problem and recommended solutions for
Congress. OTA said legislation is needed. Subcommittee Chairman Condit (D-Cal.)
said the panel's staff has started to develop a bill.
MARKEY'S PRIVACY BILL
Markey, as expected, introduced his privacy bill that contains some of the provisions
from last year's measure but with new safeguards on reuse and resale of customer
information. The bill is intended in part to (1) correct FCC action on customer
proprietary network information (CPNI) rules that leave out consumers with fewer than
20 phone lines, and (2) set ground rules for disclosing toll records. The bill also
creates the "privacy bill of rights for electronic media" by requiring the FCC to set up
privacy protections for future technologies. The bill would also set a national per-call
standard for Caller ID. Protection of customer proprietary network information could
become a major issues if regional Bells are allowed into long distance services.
The bill would:
(1)
Prohibit telcos from disclosing or selling customers' proprietary network
information (CPNI) without their "affirmative consent."
(2)
Provide a "minimum privacy standard" for Caller ID, with per-call blocking, as
CLOSE HOLD
reported last year.
(3)
Require businesses that use Automatic Number Identification with 800 or 900
numbers to tell consumers of the intention to reuse or sell information
generated by Automatic Number Identification.
(4)
Require the FCC to establish basic privacy principles for consumers, including
giving them the right to knowledge that information is being collected about
them, a notice of intent to reuse or sell data, and the right to refuse use of data
by collecting companies.
GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATI
RUSSIANS TO CONNECT TO INTERNET:
NASA is helping Moscow's Space Research Institute connect to Internet. The
connection to the on-line service will allow scientists in the USA and Russia to
communicate directly beginning in January. Officials of the NASA Science Internet
will lend Russians computer networking equipment to help set up the Russian Space
Science Internet.
FAA COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM DEDICATED:
The Federal Aviation Administration this month dedicated a new telecommunications
system. It's meant to prevent outages like the one in the Northeast Sept. 17, 1991
when more than 1,000 flights were canceled or delayed, affecting 85,000 passengers.
The system is installed at the 20 air route centers that guide planes between airports,
but won't be fully operational until the end of 1995.
HOUSE SCIENCE & TECH ON THE INTERNET
The House Science & Technology Committee plans to bring up its own computer
bulletin board-type system at the end of next year. The System, with committee
information and other data, would be accessible only on Internet, not as a stand alone
system.
OTA ASKS FOR NEW STRATEGY FOR GOVT. ELECTRONIC SERVICES
Strategy Necessary
OTA, in a report on federal electronic services, argues that the federal government
needs to come up with a strategy for electronic delivery of services and information or
technology's potential may not be realized. In the report, Making Government Work:
Electronic Delivery of Federal Services, OTA suggested several steps that Congress
could take, such as holding annual hearings on how well agencies provide information
on-line and on the role of FTS 2000. OTA argued that the benefits, while
CLOSE HOLD
considerable, aren't guaranteed, issuing warnings on how electronic delivery of
information and services are implemented. Without proper planning, OTA said,
electronic services could wind up being used mostly by the affluent, neglecting large
parts of the population. It recommended that the government set up partnerships with
local organizations to make information distribution more efficient.
Service Delivery
The use of computer networks to deliver services could be workable if networks are
made more accessible and affordable, according to OTA.
OTA recommendations:
Grass-roots involvement.
Community infrastructure development, including schools, libraries and other
local institutions, to deliver services.
Encouragement of innovation by federal agencies and employees.
Creation of directories of agency services.
Tests of delivery systems on regional or national scale before full deployment.
OTHER TECHNOLOGY
FIBER OPTIC CONSTRUCTION SURGES:
The dawning communications age has unleashed a frenzy of fiber optic construction.
Phone companies and cable TV companies can't put up the cables fast enough. If
anything can slow the amazing pace of change in the communications industry, it
might be a jam-up at the construction level. Contractors that can handle major fiber
jobs are swamped. Building fiber isn't particularly difficult work, but some of it -
splicing fibers, keeping up with evolving network designs - is pretty specialized. So
contractors that can handle major fiber jobs are swamped. Most are small, privately
owned companies. No one knows the total amount of fiber being built this year, but
the pieces add up to a daunting pace. Bell Atlantic says it will spend $15 billion over
five years. New Jersey Bell is spending $1.5 billion to rewire the state with fiber.
And the National Cable Television Association predicts more than 75 percent of cable
systems will be rebuilt over the next 10 years at a cost of $ 14 billion.
SATELLITE DISH SALES SORE WHILE DESCRAMBLERS IN SHORT SUPPLY
The tremendous growth in satellite TV business in the last few months has been
tempered by the inability of manufacturers to obtain enough descrambler modules
partly because of poor planning. Satellite retailers say that disgruntled cable customers
are flocking to dealers in large numbers, in part over dissatisfaction with results of
1992 Cable Act. However, satellite TV no longer is considered an alternative to cable,
but can be seen as additional service to some consumers.
CLOSE HOLD
MISCELLANEOUS
SUPREME COURT RULES ON INFORMATION SERVICES
The Supreme Court yesterday let the regional Bells continue offering information
services such as home education and electronic yellow pages. The court, without
comment, rejected arguments by consumer groups and information competitors that a
lower court wrongly let the Bells enter the highly competitive market. Those groups
say the regional Bells could gain a monopolistic advantage through their ownership of
the phone lines.
SOME WILL BE LEFT BEHIND BY INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY ACCORDING TO BARRET
FCC Commissioner Andrew Barrett has said that he opposes any notion that the
government must guarantee universal access to new telecommunications technologies
such as interactive cable television. At a forum in Chicago on cable regulation,
Barrett suggested that some people will be left behind when the information
superhighway comes. According to Barrett, the Government ought not to guarantee
access to developing telecommunication technologies as it did for telephone service
and municipal water service.
ZENITH WANTS HDTV CHANNELS Now
Zenith's Chairman Jerry Pearlman has suggested that the FCC ought to allocate HDTV
channels even before it sets HDTV standard. He said if FCC did that in next 6
months, broadcasters could begin using channels to transmit digital NTSC and digital
data, generating revenue now with the understanding that they would switch to HDTV
when it's available. Pearlman also predicted that 1-2 million HDTV sets would be
sold in first year they're available in 1996, with 10% household penetration in 4-5
years (more than CDs or VCRs did in 4-5 years).
CABLE VIEWERSHIP HITS ALL-TIME HIGH
The Gore Perot Debate on Larry King Live drew the biggest rating for any regularly
scheduled program in the history of cable television -- an 11.9 (Each rating point
represents 942,000 homes.) That means over 11 million homes tuned in to see Perot
Gored. In homes that recieve CNN, the rating for the debate was an 18.1. The
previous high figure for cable was an 11.5 national rating scored by a Larry King
program during the Persian Gulf War in 1991.
Telecommunica hous-NII
11/15/93
12:54
202 482 4191
POLICY OFFICE
1
003/008
DRAFT November 15, 1993
copy.for copytislitz
MEMORANDUM FOR
The Vice President
Secretary Brown
FROM:
Dave Barram
Larry Irving
Jonathan Sallet
SUBJECT:
NII Legislation
The Vice President's announcement at the BRIE Conference that the Administration
will introduce its own Nil legislation at the beginning of the next session requires the
implementation of an inter-agency process that will produce the substantive policy, the
specific legislative language, and the political strategy to make our efforts a success.
This memorandum is in three parts:
Proposed Workplan for Nil Legislative Process
Working List of NII Issues
Analytical Approach to Un-resolved Issues
I. NII Legislative Workplan
A workplan needs to be constructed for the NII effort as a whole, and we will
propose such a comprehensive workplan by the Vice President's Breakfast on November
30th. Because of the immediacy of the requirement that legislation be written, however, a
stand alone legislative roadmap needs to be adopted now.
A. Timeline for Preparation of Legislation
11/18
Initial Meeting of the Nil Legislative Working Group - Double "screen
process" by which the group considers (i) which issues need to be
included in the legislative process and (ii) of those that will be
included, which have consensus and are ready for legislative drafting,
and which require additional policy analysis.
11/18-11/29 Nii Legislative Working Group (i) prepares legislative draft of those
issues on which consensus has been reached, and (ii) policy option
papers on those that remain unresolved and alternative drafts of
legislative language.
11/30
Vice President's breakfast - review of comprehensive workplan and
NII Legislative Working Group activities.
12/1
NII Legislative Working Group meets to reach consensus on
unresolved issues. Issues that remain unresolved are subject to
11/15/93
12:54
202 482 4191
POLICY OFFICE
004/008
continued discussions.
12/7
Legislative Drafting on resolved issues finished.
Week of
Presentation to the Vice President and Secretary Brown of options on
12/7
any unresolved issues.
12/7-12/21
Vice President and Secretary Brown deliver NII speeches.
12/21
All Legislative Drafting completed.
1/3-1/10
Circulation of NII Legislation to Key Hill Contacts
1/20
Formal Introduction of NII Legislation
B. Operational Groups
In addition to the primary duties of the NII Legislative Working Group, a series of
additional tasks need to be performed simultaneously with the preparation of our NII
legislation. These tasks include:
Legislative Liaison -though oup
Outreach and Consultation (Private-Sector, Inter-governmental,
Non-Profit)
Communications/Public Affairs
The manner in which these operations will be handled between now and January
should be established at the November 18th meeting of the Nil Legislative Working Group.
One special note: It will be important to name and convene the private-sector NII Advisory
Council by the end of the year, so that we can have the input of its members.
C. The NII Legislative Working Group
The NII Working Group should be formed to coordinate the basic policy/legislative
functions and should be chaired by Larry Irving, who serves as the Chair of the
Telecommunications Policy Committee of the IITF and Administrator of NTIA. Its members
should represent:
Department of Commerce NTIA/Office of Policy and Strategic
Planning
Office of the Vice President
National Economic Council
Office of Science and Technology Policy
Department of Justice - -- Antitrust Division
Office of Management and Budget
Council on Economic Advisors
The views of the FCC and other appropriate entities should be sought as to whether
11/15/93
12:54
202 482 4191
POLICY OFFICE
005/008
there are any legal, policy, or political impediments to FCC participation on this Working
Group.
11. Identification of Issues
As noted above, the first task of the NII Legislative Working Group should be to
inventory outstanding issues concerning the NII and then to (i) identify which of those
should be addressed by the Administration legislation and (ii) which of those that need to
be addressed are ready for legislative drafting, and which require additional policy analysis.
An October 28th memorandum from Larry Irving to the Vice President and
Secretary of Commerce outlined one group of issues relating to S. 1086 that could be
included in the legislation and on which it is believed Administration consensus has been
reached. They include:
Promote the development of local telephone competition (including the
preemption of state regulation that bars competitive entry).
Permit telephone companies to enter cable television markets, subject to
safeguards that would prohibit a telephone company from purchasing,
acquiring, or merging with cable television operators that provide service in
the telephone company's service area.
Support non-discriminatory access by information providers and
programmers to the infrastructure.
Maintain and extend the "universal service" goal for consumers.
Provide limited exceptions to the long distance service restrictions on the Bell
Operating Companies so that they can provide cellular and cable television
service more efficiently.
Require Bell companies to use separate subsidiaries in providing certain types
of information services.
The October 28th memorandum also listed issues on which inter-agency agreement
had not been reached:
Whether and under what terms to permit the Bell companies to enter the
long distance telecommunications business (beyond the limited exceptions
cited above).
To what degree the Bell Companies should be permitted to enter the
manufacturing business (consensus appears to be forming that they should
at least be permitted to perform more research and development than at
present).
The specific regulatory mechanisms needed to ensure that information
providers and programmers have nondiscriminatory access to the networks
of the cable companies and telephone companies, which now are regulated
11/15/93 12:55
202 482 4191
POLICY OFFICE
1
006/008
differently.
The specific ways to expand the universal service goal and develop new
funding mechanisms for it.
The degree to which state regulators should be preempted from imposing
rate regulations that could impede competition.
A November 1 memorandum from Larry Irving and Anne Bingaman proposed further
refinements to several of these positions. A copy of that memorandum is attached.
III. Analysis of Unresolved Issues
NTIA is preparing a memorandum which will provide a framework to help identify
key issues for consideration by the NII Legislative Working Group. This memorandum will
be submitted by November 22.
11/15/93
12:55
202 482 4191
POLICY OFFICE
007/008
November 1, 1993
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Vice President Gore
Secretary Brown
FROM:
Larry Irving
Anne Bingaman
SUBJECT:
Follow-up to October 28 Memorandum on
Information Infrastructure Policy Issues
Based on further discussions between NTIA and the Justice
Department's Antitrust Division, we have agreed on refinements to
several of the positions mentioned in the October 28 memorandum
from Assistant Secretary Irving to Vice President Gore and
Secretary Brown. Specifically, the Administration should
recommend amending S. 1086 so as to:
Prohibit a telephone company from purchasing, acquiring, or
merging with a cable system that provides service in the
telephone company's service area. However, an absolute ban
on such transactions would remain in effect only for a
specified period (e.g., 12 years). Thereafter, the FCC
would have authority (1) to waive the restriction on a case-
by-case basis if the public interest warrants, or (2) to
remove the ban entirely if it determines, after a
rulemaking, that elimination would be in the public
interest.
Require Bell companies to use separate subsidiaries in
providing all information services. However, Congress would
delegate to the FCC the task of developing specific
regulations. Moreover, Congress would indicate, in
legislative language or in legislative history, that the FCC
would have discretion to prescribe differing levels of
structural separation for different types of information
services or in different markets.
Establish conditions for Bell Company entry into long
distance telecommunications (beyond the exceptions in S.
1086)
--
Such conditions should result in a broad, but flexible,
standard for identifying when there is sufficient
competition at the local level to permit Bell Company
provision of long distance services.
It is also necessary to establish a process for
determining whether the standard has been met. This
process should involve joint review by the FCC and DOJ,
with DOJ retaining the right to challenge, under the
antitrust laws, any conduct permitted by the FCC. (We
believe that such a proposal would be unacceptable to
11/15/93
12:55
0202 482 4191
rolici OFFICE
2
Chairman Brooks in the absence of such involvement by
DOJ).
Apply the standard established for Bell Company entry into
long distance services to Bell Company participation in
manufacturing activities, including research and development
(R&D). Efforts should be made to avoid drawing lines
between R&D and other manufacturing activities.
Preempt state rate and entry regulation of non-dominant
carriers, as well as providers of video services, in order
to facilitate market entry. The definition of "market
dominance" should be left to the FCC.
Ensure (1) universal service and (2) non-discriminatory
access to telephone and cable networks by information
providers and programmers.
--
Telephone companies may object to access requirements
imposed on them with respect to video programming if
such requirements are not also imposed on other cable
operators.
---
While regulatory parity is a concern, it may not
presently be technically feasible to impose similar
common carrier obligations on incumbent cable
operators. Nevertheless, imposition of such common
carrier requirements on the telephone networks is
essential.