John Dingell wasted no time in reasserting his authority over the FCC today. One day after the election that put the Democrats back in charge of the House after 12 years, DIngell–who is expected to take back his old reins as Commerce Committee Chairman–sent a message to the FCC that it should hold off on approving the BellSouth-AT&T merger until next year.
“I think it would be in their interest” said the incoming chairman, adding it “would be in the interest of the [Commerce] Committee” and “in the broad public interest”.
Dingell said that delay was needed to make sure the Department of Justice was “doing its responsibility” and that FCC was ensuring the public interest was served.
Never mind that the merger has already been pending eight months, and has been approved by DOJ and 18 state commissions already. FCC approval in fact was expected last week, until it was pulled from the FCC agenda at the last minute. Dingell would now like the transaction to stew for a few more months. Although later today he backed off the statement a bit, denying he had asked for a postponement, the message was clear, saying he wanted the Commission to avoid “ill will” in dealing with the Commerce Committee.
The whole thing evokes a sense of deja vu. In his long tenure as committee chairman before 1994, Dingell was famous for vigorously asserting authority over the FCC. Of course, Dingell was far from the only chairman to do so. Quaint theories that the FCC is an “independent agency” aside, the Commission has long been considered a “creature of Congress” by members from both parties. But no chairman protected that particular turf more jeolously than Dingell. He brought it almost to the level of an art form.
No one doubts, of course, that agencies are ultimately accountable to lawmakers. But there is something disturbing about the “creature of Congress” theory, especially when the decisions in question is a quasi-judicial one such as a merger approval. Certainly, there would be howls of protest if Congress asked the Justice Department to delay its legal process in a particular case. But the FCC’s processes are apparently fair game.
Don’t expect the Commission to buck Big John on this one. But it provides yet another reason to re-examine the FCC’s status an an “independent” agency, and how that works in practice.
Meanwhile, settle in for an interesting few years.
The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.
Comments on this entry are closed.