Brain Drain, Admin Failures Threaten the FCC's Role

coondoggie writes "The Federal Communications Commission has brain drain and administration problems that could decrease its effectiveness at a time when advanced service technologies such as wireless and broadband present significant regulatory challenges. On the brain drain front, a report out today (PDF) from watchdogs at the Government Accountability Office stated that from fiscal year 2003 to 2008, the number of engineers at the FCC decreased by 10%. Similarly, the overall number of economists decreased by 14%. While the total number of engineers and economists in the workforce has decreased from 2003 to 2008, the percentages remained the same. The GAO also criticized the FCC's public comment policy, saying, 'While FCC relies heavily on public input to inform its decisions, it tends to do so without giving the public access to the actual text of a given proposal. If parties are able to submit vague summaries that may not fully reflect meetings between FCC officials and outside parties, then stakeholders will continue to question whether commission decisions are being influenced by information that was not subject to public comment or rebuttal and that, in some cases, is submitted just before a commission vote.'"

Comments

Hmm

[mewsenews]

Is this the same FCC that took a "save the children" stance over some wardrobe malfunction a while back?

I wonder why intelligent people would flee an organization guided by puritanism..

(FCC, free advice, stick to regulating wavelengths and you'll get more support from scientists and engineers)

Re:Hmm

[tlhIngan]

Is this the same FCC that took a "save the children" stance over some wardrobe malfunction a while back?

I wonder why intelligent people would flee an organization guided by puritanism..

(FCC, free advice, stick to regulating wavelengths and you'll get more support from scientists and engineers)

Except it wasn't the FCC who really wanted to do it, but the fact that a puritanical lobby group got offended, and flooded the FCC with complaints. The Parents Television Council offers ways to easily send in complaints, and it's estimated that 99% of the complaints came from the PTC. Unfortunately, by legislation, the FCC has to act on these complaints, even if they're stupid.

Source: One boob == 963,000 FCC complaints

Re:Hmm

[TubeSteak]

Except it wasn't the FCC who really wanted to do it, but the fact that a puritanical lobby group got offended, and flooded the FCC with complaints. The Parents Television Council offers ways to easily send in complaints, and it's estimated that 99% of the complaints came from the PTC.

IIRC, the FCC has since reformed their counting process specifically because of groups like the PTC.
The FCC now discounts cookie cutter and form letters because, like you said, they were making up 90%+ of the complaints.

[Citation Needed] but I can't seem to dig up any articles I had read on the topic.

Re:Hmm

[AndersOSU]

There is no fairness doctrine. It's been dead since 1987.

Re:Hmm

[AndersOSU]

no.

It's completely, utterly and totally dead. It's pining for the fjords. It is no more. There is nothing even remotely resembling the fairness doctrine in american media.

If there were, AM radio would be radically different.

Re:Hmm

[AndersOSU]

One thing I've never understood is that the same people who complain about the "liberal media" seem to think that liberals want to shove the fairness doctrine down the public's collective throat. Yes it's a bad idea, yes some bonehead dems bring it up every once in a while, but the thing has no legs. And whats more, if there were such a thing as the liberal media, the fairness doctrine would necessarily increase conservative views on the airways.

Now, to address your tangent, nationalization is what we did to GM and AIG.

Nationalization of healthcare would require the government to actually step up to the plate and fund healthcare, something Washington is clearly too chickenshit to do - probably because a government run insurance plan isn't likely to make campaign contributions.

If you want my opinion, the reason healthcare is now unpopular is because were the senate to take up the National Everyone Gets a Pony Act they'd probably attach a mandatory dog food provision to it.

The question, in my mind, is why has public opinion on universal healthcare soured so dramatically since November 2008? The only answer I can come up with is that while no one wants to see good sausage being made, we've spent the last year watching Harry Reid let Nelson, Lieberman et al stuff that sucker with the foulest ingredients imaginable.

Re:Wait

[quatin]

What? What don't they need economists for? The impacts that frequency block control on the economy is huge! You can't go willy nilly assigning chunks of spectrum out without considering the economic impact it will generate.

More Than One Way to Deregulate

[mpapet]

Another regulatory agency being gutted right before our eyes. At what point do Americans call 'enough!' on corporate hegemony?

Enjoy your corporate deathburger: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3pIDSQ1rdA

Re:More Than One Way to Deregulate

[MindlessAutomata]

That's just it. People expect the government to be this magical source of goodness and righteousness like a magical deity, somehow outside of the corruption of human behavior, if we only *try* hard enough, yet people can't possibly be good enough consumers to control a free market.

Then people whine on about fairness and "rights" when they use the words so nebulously they're devoid of meaning. What action is supposed to be "fair?" Of course, I'll get that person's subjective feelings on what "fair" is, while they chestbeat about how their personal opinions on how the world should be run are objective moral truths that they discovered by reading the Huffington Post.

The truth is, in a democracy such as ours there is an underlying free market in politics as well as business--it's ultimately up to the people to "regulate" government by voting (and in an ideal world) "regulate" business by witholding patronage, but people simply can't do it. Democracy is a sham. Just look at the replies I get, they tell me standard civics dogma like I'm unfamiliar with it and they laden it with all sorts of idealistic praise and unrealistic wish-fulfillment.

Government really is just a sort of deux-ex-machina of justice. It's supposed to "just be" good and not-corrupt and effective etc etc, and since people have that naive vision of government they go on pretending that if they wear rosy enough glasses government will become what they want it to be, and not what it is.

Instead what we really see, past all the democratic (lowercase D!) ideology, is collusion between business and government, with the ideologues putting on the blame on business and none of it on government, because Government Is Supposed To Be Inherently Good while Profits Are Bad.

Whine about Monsanto either because they make GM crops (which are good unless you buy into pseudoscience, more food for people, but weren't made by the government so are therefore evil) or because they get ridiculous patents on planet DNA (which IS bad but let's totally ignore the entity that makes up the patent system and enforces it), or because a big business is offering you a business deal you don't like ("I deserve better than this! I HAVE ARBITRARILY-DETERMINED RIGHTS!")

It's also funny how people are so willing to regulate what kind of offers businesses can offer consumers yet they're totally unwilling to regulate politicians the same way. I expect to just see more of what people learned in civics class, more uncritical nonsense where governments are ruled by angels and not men and institutions that create war and kill people are more dangerous than institutions that mainly just offer whatever deal will make them most profitable (not that businesses haven't killed or such before).

Wouldn't have anything to do with OUTSOURCING?

[gestalt_n_pepper]

"...from fiscal year 2003 to 2008, the number of engineers at the FCC decreased by 10%."

Gee, that wouldn't have anything to do with OUTSOURCING, would it?

Some idiot with a microphone will soon start blaming the education system. It's NOT the education system. It's the MONEY system. No rational, self-interested human is going to spend a lot of time and money to enter a field where they get to compete with people making $12 per hour. If the government is serious about getting more engineers in the USA, there's a simple, easy answer. PAY THE ENGINEERS WHAT THEY'RE WORTH, not "What the wage-arbitraged market will bear."

Re:Wouldn't have anything to do with OUTSOURCING?

[Anonymous Coward]

FACT: In 2005 the FCC outsourced it's entire IT operations to a single large federal contractor called SI International in order to save lots of money. Existing federal employees were given decreased roles or given the boot. That's probably around the time things started hitting the fan. Bad decisions lead to their current situation.

Re:Wouldn't have anything to do with OUTSOURCING?

[scamper_22]

The problem is the rest of society is not paid a wage-arbitrated market value :P
A large part of the economy is the public sector which just negotiates its pay with government and is not market based.
Doctors and lawyers limit their market supply and increase their demand via regulations ...

As such an engineer faces a severe imbalance in the West. They are talented enough to enter one of these jobs with an inflated pay scale not tied to the market. That is where they are going.

If we were all paid a market arbitrated wage, then there would be no problem. The market would in fact sort out these kinds of issues. Globally, I am probably worth $15 dollars an hour as an engineer. Globally, a teacher is probably worth $8 dollars an hour... There is a reason most western countries have severe structural deficits.

That portion of their society receiving non market arbitraged wages is grown too large relative to the market wages... and have not been corrected.
As Detroit's economy collapsed and high paying manufacturing and engineering jobs were lost... should that not have translated to lower wages for the public sector, doctors, lawyers... in that region?

We need to pick one system and stick to it as much as possible.
Either we let freedom reign and let people pay others what they think they are worth (market system).
Or we have some abstract pay scale where people negotiate their wages with the government.

Either way, it has to apply to most of society equally.

Ridiculous

[copponex]

Of course you can. The so called experts are no match for the inherent genius of the free market. Just shrink regulatory agencies to nothing, and appoint graduates of Liberty University to all the top posts. With the Free Market unshackled and Good and Simple Judeo-Christians running the show, what's the worst thing that could happen?

Re:Ridiculous

[maxume]

Disney?

You wonder? I'll tell you

[Monkeedude1212]

This all goes back to the days of Bill Clinton. The truth of the matter is, he didn't have sexual relations with any woman. There are even rumours that he is still a virgin. Chelsea is actually the result of Hillary reproducing asexually, under the reason that no one would want to regularily. This genetic mutation is considered an evolutionary advantage to some, so valuable that they want to keep it secret. This is why there was so much news surrounding Jenna Bush and none around Chelsea.

They ran some tests on CC. She has shown not only the ability to reproduce look alikes (see Hilary Duff), but also other another mutant power; laser eyes. Cyclops is actually an inspired character based on Chelsea. She currently works at Cern, powering the LHC with her amazing gifts. But as we all know, not everything is as it seems. We've all heard the stories about how the LHC is going to create black holes and destroy the Earth. It IS going to happen, in 2012, its a proven fact. It's all part of the Democrats plan. Why you ask? Despite beating the Republicans in the elections its never enough. They held a secret meeting in a hotel board room where they discussed ways to get rid of the Republicans for good. The vote was unanimous: Destroy the Earth.

So we were completely safe for 8 years while George was in power. He of course staged 9-11 to start the War on Terror so that he could reduce the amount of liquids allowed on airplanes, thus keeping the American population from over-hydration. A disguised way to protect us all from the looming threat of too much water. Water, angry in a fit of rage, retaliated with Hurricane Katrina.

And now we've got Obama back in power. How can you be certain he is in on the plan to black-hole the Earth? CHANGE. You know what another word for Change is? MUTATE. Remember Chelsea? Bingo! And look at those ears! They can't be natural! I know what you are thinking: What does all of this have to do with the FCC - the one loose knot left to tie. All the Engineers are leaving: Why? Joining CERN at the LHC. All the Economists are leaving: Why? They are needed to keep up the ruse that the economy is getting better, just long enough to keep order until the LHC can create a black hole. Of course the FCC's Administration is failing. It is under direct attack by the worlds most organized, powerful, and underhanded groups. A group which is hellbent on making sure the entire world is destroyed. And nothing, no silly Commission started a long time ago, is going to stand in their way.

Ladies and Gentlemen, its already too late.

Take a number, FCC

[MikeRT]

From late 2007 on, the federal government has been "quietly" laying off contractors left and right. It just so happens that most federal engineers are contractors...

Bitch all you want about the state of things, but the fact is that it's cheaper for the federal government to outsource this work. Contractors can be fired without mercy and don't require a pension (more pay up front in exchange for no pension is a deal for the tax payers, especially as life spans climb.)

PRIVATIZE IT.

[Gerafix]

Seriously. The Corporations know what the American people want more than the FCC. The Corporations will give America all the sex, drugs, and American Idol they want. FCC? Friggin' bunch of crazy Jesus freak Catholics pretty much.

Re:PRIVATIZE IT.

[Registered Coward v2]

Seriously. The Corporations know what the American people want more than the FCC. The Corporations will give America all the sex, drugs, and American Idol they want. FCC? Friggin' bunch of crazy Jesus freak Catholics pretty much.

Actually, most of the Catholic's I've met have no problem with nudity, alcohol or people enjoying themselves. The Baptists, however, seem to be in a constant state of worry that someone, somewhere, is having fun and that might lead to dancing...

Re:Who needs them anyway

[pclminion]

And I should point out that your sarcasm detector appears to be faulty.

It's not faulty, it was just suffering unacceptable interference from an unshielded device

Re:"Republicanism" at work.

[OttoErotic]

I'm no censorship expert but I wouldn't consider the PRMC to be a 'pale shadow' of anything. Their kind of forced labeling enables policies like Wal-Mart censorship, which I think is just as destructive as any legallly-enforced censorship; it certainly hurts artists more.

Besides which, when did "less evil" become synonymous with "not evil"? It should be obvious that I'm no Republican sympathizer, and the zeal with which people jump to their party's defense is depressing and surprising. If the Democrats are marginally less inclined to asshole-ish behaviour, does that really make them any better? Hell, you could argue that they ought to know better. At least the Republicans seem to be upfront about being pricks.

Oh, and if your 1st line was a joke I give you all the credit in the world, but recommending that someone be modded 'troll' to limit their visibility in a conversation about puritanical censorship seems....pretty stupid.