|
She adds that what is implicit in the Commission’s competition-oriented
approach to telecommunications regulation is a recognition of the
fact that competition is a journey. "It is a journey in which
there are winners and losers, change and upheaval, and no clear
destination where all things are settled and all competitors are
satisfied. Our effort to create greater regulatory symmetry between
cable and telephone company providers of advanced high-speed broadband
networks is, but one example of that process."
"The Commission’s decisions have also embodied the understanding
that competitive markets depend on empowered consumers. Where consumers
have choices, and the ability to make them, pervasive regulation
is unnecessary. In line with this realization, we targetted regulation
to those comparatively few situations in which marketplace competition
and informed consumer choice do not increase consumer welfare. For
that reason, we have taken steps to make sure that emergency communications
work reliably for us and for those who protect us, and we have provided
parents with the information and tools needed to control their childrens’
multichannel TV viewing choices."
She says that the FCC's successes and failures, demonstrate one
fundamental truth - that regulation is most effective when it deals
with markets as they are -- not as they might once have been, and
not as we would ideally like them to be. To the extent the Commission’s
decisions on difficult issues in the days to come are based on this
principle, it will continue to advance the security and well-being
of America and its people.
Also read
All
markets need regulation: Abernathy
Bush
chooses Tate to fill vacant FCC position
|