WASHINGTON, D.C. – In his opening statement at today’s committee hearing to consider nominations for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Ranking Member Ted Cruz (R-Texas) criticized several recent FCC’s recent actions, including its unfair quashing of the Standard-General-TEGNA transaction and its failure to safeguard the taxpayer-funded American Connectivity Program from waste, fraud, and abuse. Sen. Cruz emphasized that these actions highlight that the committee should only support FCC nominees who stand for procedural fairness, respect taxpayer dollars, and exercise regulatory humility.

Sen. Cruz’s remarks as prepared for delivery are included below:

“Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I am proud of this committee’s serious approach to FCC nominees.  Considering the FCC’s power to affect our nation’s democratic discourse, the Senate cannot allow individuals who lack candor, independence, or integrity to serve on the agency.  There is simply too much at stake.

“At a minimum, nominees must be committed to following the law as written by Congress, acting transparently, and treating all parties fairly.  

“These qualities are especially critical given recent actions of the FCC Chairwoman.  Faced with a 2-2 Commission and a lawful transaction she wanted to kill, she skipped a Commission-level vote on the Standard General-TEGNA transaction and directed the FCC’s Media Bureau to do her bidding.  And to top it off, there is widespread suspicion that the Chairwoman quashed the deal to benefit a longtime Democrat donor.

“Her actions seriously damaged the FCC’s reputation.  And they impaired the ability of broadcasters to compete against big tech companies and provide local journalism.

“I will be seeking commitments from today’s nominees that they will oppose such procedural abuses that undermine the survival of local broadcasting.  Further, I am skeptical of FCC proposals to extend legacy rules to the flourishing online video market.  It’s for Congress to decide whether and how to regulate streaming; the FCC should be deregulating broadcasters so they can compete.

“The FCC exercises tremendous power not only over the media, but also over consumers’ pocketbooks. 

“Through the Universal Service Fund, or USF, the agency has imposed burdensome taxes on American consumers to fund inefficient, ever-expanding programs.  Nominees must be good stewards of funding and stand up for taxpayers’ interests.  

“Despite being repeatedly excoriated by GAO and economists for failing to track where USF money was going, the current FCC leadership failed to learn from past mistakes in setting up the Affordable Connectivity Program, or ACP.  According to the FCC’s own Inspector General, the FCC “did not apply lessons learned” and “failed to implement several important recommendations intended to enhance and safeguard the integrity of the [subsidies].”

“Rather than responding with restraint, the FCC led by Chairwoman Rosenworcel has worked to expand FCC spending, including in defiance of clear statutory limits.

“Take E-Rate: Virtually every school in the country already has high-speed broadband.  So Chairwoman Rosenworcel has sought to push E-Rate subsidies beyond schools and into students’ homes—even though the Communications Act explicitly confines authority to “classrooms.”  This illustrates regulators’ relentless appetite to ignore statutory language that stands in the way of their desired policy.

“Unfortunately, such an appetite can come at a huge cost to American taxpayers.  Nowhere has this been more evident than in FCC Democrats’ uncontrolled urge to regulate the Internet as a public utility, i.e., Obamacare for the internet.

“The growth of the Internet is perhaps the greatest deregulatory success story of our time—a fact made clear during the pandemic, when U.S. networks thrived in handling unprecedented bandwidth demands and significantly outperformed their heavily-regulated European counterparts.  Yet Democrat regulators remain hell-bent on forcing antiquated telephone monopoly rules on the competitive broadband industry.  

“Proponents for Title II have refused to take accountability for the parade of horribles they manufactured in the lead-up to the Restoring Internet Freedom Order.  Rather than articulating meaningful reasons for another policy reversal, they claim they simply want regulatory oversight—in other words, the power to micromanage providers’ pricing and terms of service, and collect billions in new USF taxes—all at the expense of investment, innovation, and consumer choice.

“Indeed, Chairwoman Rosenworcel made her ambition clear just last week when she announced an investigation into providers’ usage-based pricing—a clear signal that she wants to prohibit providers from apportioning network costs among different types of users.   

“Let’s call a spade a spade: any effort to outlaw usage-based pricing is straight-up rate regulation.  Worse, bullying providers to ban usage-based pricing would force them to raise prices across the board, making broadband more expensive for all American households.

“It is incumbent on this committee to only confirm nominees who will stand for procedural fairness, respect taxpayer dollars, and exercise regulatory humility.  While the previous FCC nominee did not live up to that standard, I look forward to hearing from today’s nominees and judging whether they have what it takes to do this important job.”

###