The FCC & Transparency

On the heels of a scathing Congressional report that criticizes FCC Chair Kevin Martin of mismanagement and abuse of power, Sonia Arrison makes the case that the FCC needs more transparency, and warns of the perils of regulation by vendetta:

The FCC has problems with transparency, so now is the time to open things up to greater public scrutiny. It is also questionable whether the FCC should have as much power as it does over the marketplace. At a time when bankers and automakers are lining up to surrender chunks of control to government bureaucrats, everyone should consider the potential consequences. The results of political decision-making, as opposed to market demand-based decisions, often yield disastrous results.

The Wall Street Journal ran an editorial that was extraordinarily critical of Kevin Martin's behavior in rigging spectrum auctions to the benefit of Silicon Valley VC John Doerr:

This is the second time this year that the FCC chief has attempted to secure a sweetheart deal for Mr. Doerr, who has personally petitioned FCC commissioners and Congress on behalf of the M2Z proposal. In January, the agency auctioned off coveted spectrum with conditions that favored Frontline Communications, an upstart headed by a former FCC Chairman, Reed Hundt, and also backed by Mr. Doerr.

Whether you tend favor market-based or regulatory decision making when it comes to the communications infrastructure, both sides should agree that any benefit of "experts" as regulators is severely diminished when they govern according to their personal animosities, rather than a sober analysis of the data and policy objectives. Transparency, discussion, and debate over key decisions would at least be some measure to curb regulation by vendetta.

UPDATE: more on this topic from TLF.