Michael K. Powell, Chairman
U.S. Federal Communications Commission

Remarks 
at the

ITU 2nd Global Symposium for Regulators

Geneva, Switzerland

December 4, 2001
[as prepared for delivery]


It is a great pleasure and honor to have an opportunity, in my first year chairing the United States 
Federal Communications Commission, to join all of you at the second annual Global Symposium 
for Regulators.  I think there is no better forum to be a participant in than this one - to be with 
my colleagues from around the world who are struggling with similar problems and challenges 
as I am.  And it gives me an opportunity to interact with each of you as we develop work goals 
and practical solutions.  

I want to personally compliment Mr. Toure for his untiring efforts to continue to drive this 
organization and for his efforts to provide the opportunity for each of us to spend time together.    

Unique Circumstances but Common challenges

We each have different systems; at times we each have different priorities.  But in many ways we 
wrestle with the same problems in each of our countries, as we attempt to affirm the welfare of 
our citizens through telecommunications development.  

Though we are all unique, we struggle with three common challenges. 

First, trying to continue or develop a solid and reliable telephone infrastructure. 

Second, being called upon to try to be sure that the infrastructure is competitive; and 

Third, finding ways to introduce new and advanced technology, broadband services and Internet 
services.  

It is very difficult to juggle these challenges.  And indeed all of us face the pressure, political or 
otherwise, to deliver results in our countries knowing that if we do well we may not receive the 
accolades, but that if we do poorly we'll be the first to be criticized.  

I wanted to take this opportunity to talk with you about that third challenge: the technology 
challenge we all struggle with to bring advanced broadband services to our nations.  I thought I 
would share with you the way we have begun to wrestle and conceptualize this challenge in the 
United States.  

The Challenge of Broadband

Let me begin by talking about what broadband is.  One would think that there was a uniform 
understanding of what this technology is that we are trying so aggressively to provide.  First and 
foremost it's important to recognize that this service is unique;  it is not a simple extension of the 
telephone system, nor is it simply a new version of wireless services.  It is actually a fusion -- a 
coming together of three very central components.  

The first we are very familiar with -- communications technology and communications power.  

The second we are becoming increasingly familiar with -- computer power.  And lastly, content.  
Broadband can best be seen as the coming together or fusion of these three things.  If any one of 
them fails to materialize effectively, then the promise -- the digital opportunity afforded by 
broadband -- will not arise.  In the United States, we struggle with how to conceptualize this new 
service.  

Another important attribute of broadband technology is its power as a platform for innovation.  
With regard to the telephone system, we all understood and still understand what the key 
applications are: simply to communicate through our voices.  The broadband platform is unique 
in this regard because there are many potential applications.  And, more importantly, the 
innovation and development of them will come not just from governments, not just from 
institutions, but from individual citizens who can take advantage of this infrastructure -- and its 
power to innovate -- and can create applications and services with their fellow countrymen.  
Domestic regulatory regimes are not accustomed to a platform that has to constantly experiment 
and evolve in its efforts to find the key applications for consumers.  

U.S. Principles for Broadband Development

In the United States we have begun to try to figure out and conceptualize the parameters and 
principles of government policy for broadband services.  

First and foremost, we recognize that broadband deployment is an economic development issue.  
It is not simply a utility problem for regulatory authorities to consider. For it will demand and 
require the effort of the entire government and all of our creativity in order to develop an 
environment in which this new service can flourish. We know that it has to be a system that can 
attract private investment in order to deploy these new and advanced infrastructures.

As telecommunications regulators, we do not control all of the pieces required for successful 
broadband deployment.  But without all of the pieces we will not have broadband. Therefore, the 
key, as we see it as regulators in the United States both at the federal level and the state level, is 
to conceive of ourselves as ambassadors for broadband.  And in this role we must do more than 
wrestle only with the problems that exist in the regulatory authorities, we must be a spokesperson 
with the legislature, and an advocate with the president and the ministers responsible for related 
areas such as finance and trade.  We must help these political players see the importance of the 
economic development that will stem from this new service. 

Secondly, we have made a commitment that broadband must exist on as many platforms as 
possible.  We believe it is incorrect to conceive of broadband as a telephone infrastructure, or 
cable modem infrastructure, or a wireless infrastructure, or a satellite infrastructure.  It is and 
must be all of these things, and we hope to develop policies that are neutral as to each of them, 
and to promote each of them. 

Why is this important?  First of all, it allows multiple solutions for different parts of a given 
country.  There is a very different challenge in the rural parts of our nations for broadband than 
there is in the urban centers of our nations.  Satellite unquestionably will be the most important 
and viable broadband platform in the rural parts of our countries. In more dense populations and 
urban centers wireline solutions will be more valuable.  And wireless networks will play a 
critical part.  If we don't have an environment that fosters and develops each of these platforms, 
we run the risk that major parts of our populations will remain unserved or underserved.  

Multiple platforms are also important because they promote competition in distribution.  For 
many, many years we have regulated a monopoly infrastructure in which a single institutional 
player or small number of players controlled assets to users.  The more platforms there are, the 
more competitive choices there will be for distribution and the less need there will be for heavy 
and onerous regulation.  

Finally multiple platforms are important because we do not know where this technology ride 
ends.  We need to make sure we have an environment that allows for constant change and 
migration as these new technologies evolve. 

The third area in which we are dedicating government energy is the promotion of partnerships 
between communities and the government in order to aggregate demand for these new services.  
We all understand that infrastructure does not get built unless there are markets and users 
prepared to operate on them.  Not only is government a central customer to produce demand for 
the infrastructure itself, but in the United States we have begun to form partnerships, or promote 
partnerships in communities so they can collect their resources and create the demand that will 
allow those services to be brought to their communities.

Finally, and very importantly, we recognize that we must facilitate content availability over the 
infrastructure.  Our citizens do not buy network lines.  They do not buy satellite dishes.  They 
buy what is delivered to them over those infrastructures.  That content will not materialize for 
broadband if our laws are too onerous.  In the United States we struggle with copyright - and to 
what degree it is an impediment to content provision.  The result of this struggle will be a critical 
and third piece to broadband.

How should it be regulated?  In our view, the broadband environment should be one of minimal 
regulation.  The reasons are simple.  First of all, as I mentioned earlier, we recognize that 
broadband is a new and unique service.  We do not accept automatically that the assumptions of 
our regulatory choices in the telephone or telecommunications arena automatically apply to this 
new service.  We fear that we run the risk of making mistakes by assuming characteristics from 
the past that are not necessarily true with regard to the future.  

We also recognize that we are trying to build an infrastructure as opposed to regulating a mature 
infrastructure.  Thus, we need a regulatory environment that provides the incentives necessary to 
deploy new services on the part of the private sector.  The more onerous the regulatory 
environment, the costs of deployment become higher and riskier and more difficult. 

And most importantly, we believe in a minimally regulated environment because the services 
have yet to take shape.  We don't know what it is that our consumers are waiting to do with this 
new broadband infrastructure, and we are fearful of intervening prematurely in a way that 
frustrates experimentation and creativity on that platform.  Perhaps one of the most notorious 
examples is IP telephony.  In the United States we have yet to choose to regulate IP telephony 
and are confident of that decision.  We do not assume it is simply a new form of an old friend.  
Indeed, what is IP telephony?  Certainly, at its most basic it is a replication of existing 
communications.  

But remember that it need not be.  While with telephone service I may speak to my friend and 
have my voice come out the other end, IP telephony offers the promise that I may speak in 
English and my voice will come out in French.  Or, I speak about a news event and data 
associated with those events will be delivered at the same time.  It is a mistake, I believe, to see 
IP telephony in only its most basic form.  The real possibility of IP telephony is that it rides as an 
application on other data networks.  We believe that there is much to be learned from our 
example in this regard, and are happy to be engaged with many countries as they struggle with 
the question of how to treat this new service.  

Finally, we all have the challenge that we must act on universal service.  We are committed to 
ensuring that all Americans in our nation have access to the new technologies, and at affordable 
rates.  But we also recognize that the old solutions of direct subsidies or other forms of  service 
may not be the best way to do it.  We are committed to the goals of universal service but we 
continue to be open-minded as to the solutions and approaches to achieve it.

In conclusion, broadband and digital technologies are great inventions that hold out great 
promise for our economies and for the lives and welfare of our citizens.  But only if we give 
these technologies an environment that is nurturing and will allow them to blossom and develop 
into the great platform that we envision.  If a third of us in this room get that right, we will have 
presented a digital opportunity for our citizens that would be unparalleled in world history.  I 
look forward to working with you as a friend and colleague as we attempt to work through that 
challenge.  Thank you very much.


3

1