Opening Statement of
CommissionerMignon Clyburn
Federal CommunicationsCommission
Before the Congressional Forum
On Net Neutrality
Hosted by Congresswoman Doris O. Matsui
September 24, 2014
Thank you, CongresswomanMatsui, for hosting this Congressional Forum, which focuses
on, what I believe, is one of the most important issues before the Federal Communications
Commission today – retaining and promoting a free and open Internet for everyone. The
Congresswoman clearly understands the importance of a free Internet and I appreciate her
leadership on this as well as many other issues, including broadband adoption and Lifeline. I
sincerely appreciate the invitation to participate and believe it is important to hear the views of
interested parties outside of the beltway.
This hearing, as the Congresswoman noted, will be part of the House Energy and
Commerce Committee record and I am pleased to note that the forum and materials will also be
part of the official Federal Communications Commission record in the Open Internet docket 14-
28. So, your voices from Sacramento will be heard all over.
Speaking of voices - over three million 700,000 have spoken - and we are listening.
These numbers speak volumes of the tremendous impact the Internet has on our society.
Consumers, entrepreneurs, librarians, teachers, doctors, writers, venture capitalists, state officials,
edge providers, content providers – filed comments in our proceeding wanting the FCC to know
their views. For many, this marks the first time they have participated in a government
proceeding and highlights not only the importance of a free and Open Internet, but the power such
openness has, to encourage civic engagement.
As a public servant, I believe mymission is to listen to the voices of consumers and give
voice to those who may be unable speak. As the FCC moves forward to consider permanent
rules, my focus will be on the impact on consumers – something that I fear has gotten lost in this
debate over 706 versus Title II, and the parsing through each word of the D.C. Circuit’s decision.
The legal issues are, of course, important but, to me, it puts the cart before the horse. The critical
question, as I see it, is first, determining the right policy, and when that is established, then and
only then, determine the appropriate legal framework to achieve that result.
So just what does it mean to focus on consumers? It means ensuring that consumers
continue to pick winners and losers – not companies giving priority or the government dictating a
result for this is the free market at its best and that free market needs to be preserved.
It also means looking at how consumers are using the Internet, over fixed and mobile
devices. We must ask and determine what are the trends so we can craft rules that are flexible
enough. We need to ask what is the demand and what are the projections? What proportion of
traffic is mobile versus fixed?
2One trend that is clear is the increased reliance on mobile broadband. Mobile broadband
looks quite different than it did in 2010, when the FCC adopted different Open Internet rules for
mobile versus fixed.
The deployment of LTE was in its infancy in 2010, with 200,000 LTE subscribers. Today
there are 120 million and LTE has been deployed to a projected 300 million Americans.
The use of WiFi has also increased, and the trends suggest it will continue to do so. Cisco
projects that 52% of mobile data traffic will be offloaded to WiFi by 2018, and from the
consumers’ perspective, they often do not know whether they are using cellular data or WiFi,
because the transition is seamless. To me, this means we need to be careful, to avoid creating
differing or conflicting standards or rules for WiFi and mobile.
Along with increases in mobile broadband, the number of Americans who rely exclusively
on a mobile device, according to a recent Pew Research report, is 41% (up from 29% in 2010).
For lower-income Americans, 56% are wireless only (up from 39% in 2010), and, for Latinos of
all income levels, the number of wireless-only households is 53% (up from 38% in 2010). For
many of these lower income and Latino consumers, their mobile device is their only access to
broadband – if they have broadband at all.
Given these trends, I will be focusing my review on how different proposals will impact
the consumer’s experience.
What is the impact on a consumer whose mobile broadband may her only access to
broadband? If we have lower standards for mobile, will providers make clear that the experience
may be different?
Will consumers understand that apps or content could be blocked? And if we have a
different standard, will it disproportionally impact communities that rely on their mobile device
for connectivity?
As we continue with this debate and review, I vow to remain focused on the consumer
impact. My door remains open and I will be listening to your views.
Thank you.