As we settle in for the second presidential debate this week, it’s worth revisiting an important point that Mitt Romney made in the first debate two weeks ago. Whether you are a fan or a foe of his, one thing he did touch on was his views on regulation: “Regulation is essential. You can’t have a free market without regulation. At the same time, regulation can become excessive; it can become out of date.”
It is on this point that Mr. Romney is completely correct. Some form of regulation – in all industries, including telecommunications – is important. Regulation helps protect us from harm, from ventures that would not act in our best interest. During the debate, Mr. Romney applied this to the financial industry, noting that such regulation stops an individual from establishing a bank in his or her garage.
But Mr. Romney’s key point was that excessive regulation is just as big of an issue. This is an issue that we should all be concerned with as the telecommunications industry makes the broadband IP transition.
Our country’s existing telecommunications regulatory framework was created in the 1930s, and is actually still based on those outdated technologies. There is a true need for a new regulatory framework, but it must be created carefully and without overregulating the industry.
New technologies enable us to communicate in ways that were unimaginable eight decades ago. Modern internet-based communication technologies are integrated into video games, online customer support services, telemedicine and even home security.
For example, businesses are now using IP technology to provide streamlined customer support without having to make significant investments in traditional call centers. Instead, customer service agents are able to provide live support online, often working from home, to answer customer inquiries. Telemedicine relies on IP technologies to bring patients and doctors together who may not even be in the same community for critical medical care.
This is just the beginning of how broadband IP technology can be applied to make our lives better. In the next decade, new and even better applications will be rolled out. This is just the beginning of what’s possible, making it even clearer that it is impossible to rely on dated regulation to effectively manage 21st century technologies.
In addition, our modern telecommunications industry is a consumer-driven marketplace, much more so than it ever has been. The growth and development in telecommunications technologies is a direct response to customer needs and wants. It’s a very competitive environment and consumer choice is an important part of it. Consumers have made it clear that they want access to these new technologies, and now the industry needs to meet that need.
We do need new regulation, but with an important caveat that Mr. Romney clearly stated: “Make sure we don’t hurt the free marketplace.”
Fortunately, the blueprint for a new telecommunications regulatory framework is clear. We must encourage the needed transition toward an IP-based infrastructure built through private investment. We need to recalibrate our resources and policies, without unnecessary, regulatory additions, to advance our new digital infrastructure.
Excessive regulation will do more than simply hurt the telecommunications industry. It will stifle economic growth in a time when it is desperately needed. Our economy needs investment, sources of innovation and economic development right now.
These efforts create jobs, not just for the telecommunications industry, but for businesses that rely on these technologies to grow and be competitive in the global marketplace.
As we pass through the debates leading up to the election this year, Mr. Romney’s point about regulation is one that should resonate. It’s a bipartisan point; this is what’s best for our country, regardless of how we may vote in November.
Thad Nation is the executive director of Wired Wisconsin.
