?l?nittd returns Eatnatt WASHINGTON, DC 20510 December 1 l, 2015 The Honorable Tom Wheeler Chairman Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street SW Washington, DC 20554 Dear Chairman Wheeler: We write to express our serious concern about the Federal Communications Commission?s (FCC) recent efforts, irrespective of existing privately-owned broadband networks, to encourage the deployment of broadband networks owned by municipal governments. In February, the FCC adopted a troubling order that preempted Tennessee and North Carolina state laws regulating government-owned broadband networks. You suggested that this action was needed because ?community broadband efforts have been blocked or severely curtailed by restrictive state laws laws often passed due to heavy lobbying support by incumbent broadband providers.? Many parties, including Commissioners Pai and O?Rielly, criticized the decision for unlawfully overriding these states? sovereign authority to regulate their own municipalities. Both the state of Tennessee and the state of North Carolina have ?led legal challenges to the decision, and, tellingly, the Department of Justice recently declined to defend the FCC in court. We understand that, in the months following the decision, agency of?cials have begun engaging in outreach to persuade communities to deploy municipal broadband networks. For example, one agency of?cial recently remarked, ?Where you?ve got a community infrastructure or a rural electric company, a rural electric co?op, states shouldn?t be telling local communities what they can and cannot do.? Moreover, the FCC recently committed funding to deploy government?owned networks through the Universal Service Fund?s Rural Broadband Experiments program. It is vitally important to ensure that broadband service is made available to all Americans, particularly people in rural areas for whom a broadband connection is truly a lifeline. However, the FCC is promoting government-owned networks at the possible expense of private sector broadband providers both incumbents an_d competitors ?who have made strides to deploy networks throughout the country. Municipal broadband networks not only run the risk of overbuilding existing private networks, they could also result in the loss of limited universal service funds for carriers who are delivering broadband to rural Americans. The FCC should not be in the business of choosing winners and losers in the competitive broadband marketplace. Further, we urge the FCC to proceed cautiously where its actions would impinge on the sovereignty of fundamental state decisions about economic and ?scal policy. States are far better positioned than the federal government to understand the needs of their citizens and protect taxpayers from unnecessary and wasteful spending. It is both inappropriate and legally questionable for FCC of?cials to suggest that state governments, who are elected and accountable to the voters of the state, lack authority to regulate the economic and ?scal activities of local governments. This callous disregard for states? rights is very concerning, and we would encourage the FCC to halt its outreach campaign against the exercise of state sovereignty. To better understand the activities relating to municipal broadband, we ask that you respond to the following questions by January 4, 2016: 1) Please provide the total dollar amount that the FCC has committed to municipal broadband providers through the Universal Service Fund?s Rural Broadband Experiments program. Do any limitations exist to prevent government-owned networks from using universal service funds to compete with private sector networks? 2) Please clarify whether there is a situation in which the emergence of a new government- owned network could result in the loss of universal service funding for an existing private sector provider. 3) Please detail any plans the FCC has to adopt additional policies relating to municipal broadband. For example, does the FCC intend to extend its February 2015 decision to additional states? 4) Please highlight the outreach plans for ?scal year 2016 with respect to government-owned networks. Please identify any state or local of?cials with whom the FCC plans to meet and why. We look forward to your timely response, and we hope that, going forward, you will give thought to the appropriate role for the FCC in working with states and the private sector to encourage broadband deployment. Sincerely, mm Deb Fischer Ron Johnson United States Senator John bornyn United States Senator United States Senator Roberts United States Senator W63 Michael B. Enzi United States Senator John Barrasso United States Senator 055/ Tim Scott United States Senator