WASHINGTON-Federal Communications Commission Chairman Reed Hundt last week accused House telecommunications subcommittee Chairman Jack Fields (R-Texas) of trying to pin a nonexistent pagers-for-the-homeless proposal on the agency to drive a partisan wedge between commissioners.
“This was politics,” said Reed Hundt in written remarks prepared for a speech in New York last Tuesday. “Turns out no one actually proposed this idea.”
“Should we spend our time playing the gotcha game or should we focus on solving the complex problems of implementing the telecommunications reform bill?” Hundt asked.
At the March 27 hearing, Fields said any plan to supply pagers to the homeless would be a “distraction” that “goes far beyond” the federal mandate for FCC implementation of universal service obligations under the new telecommunications law.
Hundt, it turns out, is technically right. No such proposal ever existed in draft form or otherwise within the universal service rulemaking, according to interviews with FCC and congressional staff.
Nevertheless, Commissioners James Quello, a conservative Democrat, and ex-Commissioner Andrew Barrett, a Republican, testified their staffs informed them of such a proposal. Commissioner Rachelle Chong, a Clinton-appointed Republican, testified an early draft of the universal service proposal included consideration of wireless technologies for temporarily displaced persons.
Hundt and Commissioner Susan Ness, both Clinton Democrats, denied knowledge of a beeper-for-the-homeless scheme within the universal service plan.
Days after the hearing, aides to Quello and Barrett said they never saw a proposal to give beepers to homeless people.
But FCC officials say Hundt’s staff vigorously promoted telecommunications services for the homeless during the drafting of the universal service proposal.
Indeed, the FCC examined what role wireless telecommunications might play in reaching out to all Americans-including the poor and transient-who lack access to affordable telephone service in a related proceeding on telephone subscribership. About 94 percent of homes have telephone service.
A specific plan to equip such people with pagers, which became known jokingly in house as “pagers for pushers,” did not go far.
Hundt is said to be the strongest advocate of experimental programs to enable non-traditional segments of society, such as the homeless, migrant workers and laid-off employees, to gain access to telecommunications networks despite resistance from other commissioners who believe he’s straying from the congressional intent of the Telecom Act.
Hundt’s concern about the pagers-for-the-homeless issue becoming divisive is well founded. With Barrett’s departure last week, the FCC is left with four warring commissioners and the prospect of regulatory gridlock.
The House telecommunications subcommittee hearing’s aftermath saw a flurry of finger-pointing, accusations and counter accusations, and recanting of testimony.
Hundt’s and Ness’ staffs suggested Quello aide Pete Belvin was behind the pager-for-the-homeless fireworks, and charged Chong with distancing herself at the hearing from earlier support of a proposal to guarantee the homeless access to telecommunications services.
“That’s a lie,” replied Chong.
Chong said she did not embrace Hundt’s push to include the homeless within the universal service definition, but was willing to go along with him “in the spirit of cooperation.”
Blair Levin, chief of staff to Hundt, said Hundt was set up. He added the chairman’s staff never discussed a pagers-for-the-homeless proposal. Belvin called the accusation against her ridiculous, and said Hundt floated the idea and other “bleeding heart liberal” ones like it for months.
The specter of Quello and Ness squaring off against Hundt and Ness is particularly significant given the 80 rulemakings triggered by the new telecommunications law that the FCC must complete during the next 12 months.
Meanwhile, the pagers-for-the-homeless flare-up also raises questions about Fields’ motive in pursuing the origin of a proposal that never existed within the scope of the universal service docket.
Specifically, to what extent did Fields know or attempt to ascertain the veracity of the pagers-for-the-homeless that he tried to pin on Hundt?
“Mr. Fields was quite certain there was a proposal,” said Catherine Reid, counsel to the House Commerce Committee. Reid declined to say whether the committee had any document that included a pagers-for-the-homeless plan.
