So let me, first of all, welcome you virtually to the DEF CON Ethics Village
and introduce you briefly to those who will be watching. This is FCC Commissioner Jeffrey
Starks. Commissioner Starks was sworn in as an FCC Commissioner on January 30th of 2019.
He had previous experience at the FCC, helping to lead efforts in the FCC's Enforcement Bureau
by, among other things, handling a number of complex investigations.
He also has prior Department of Justice experience as a Senior Advisor to the Deputy
Attorney General on a variety of domestic and international matters. And this was all during
the Obama Administration. And before Commissioner Starks entered federal public service,
he practiced law at Williams and Connolly, clerked on the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals,
and also served as a legislative staffer in the Illinois State Senate and worked as a financial
analyst. So thank you again for your time, Commissioner Starks. Let me just briefly say
my name is Stephanie Pell. I'm a professor at West Point. And because I work at West Point,
I'm always required to say whenever I open my mouth in public that even though this is about
you, we're going to be talking about your views, anything that should come out of my mouth
are my views and do not represent the views of West Point, the Army, or certainly the United
States government. So let me just start with an opening question, Commissioner Starks.
For those who may not be terribly familiar with the FCC, could you give us some brief
background about its structure and mandate, specifically in reference to the issues we
will discuss today? Yes. Well, as always, great to be in dialogue with you, Stephanie. Glad to
be joining DEF CON 2020, obviously virtually here this year in the ethics village in particular.
And so for viewers who might not be familiar with the FCC, it's an independent federal agency
established back in 1934 under the Communications Act, and we're charged with,
you know, regulating interstate and foreign communications by radio, television, wire,
satellite, and cable. And so to the structure of the commission, it's directed by five commissioners,
including myself. Each commissioner is appointed by the president, subject to Senate confirmation.
And because we're an independent agency, only three commissioners can be of the same political
party, the president obviously designating one commissioner as the chairperson. You know,
and to the breadth that we serve, we have seven bureaus, 10 offices of career civil servants for
the most part, senior engineers, economists, obviously a lot of this is wrapped up in their
expertise and experience with communications. And so Congress has given us significant and
specific responsibilities, but broadly we are regulating the nation's communication networks.
And so that includes, you know, promoting deployment of advanced communication services
like broadband, like we're going to talk about, ensuring best and highest use of wireless spectrum,
administering the universal service fund, which is a fund that ensures access to modern
communications for the low income, for rural folks, for schools, libraries, regulating foreign access
to U.S. communications marketplace. We may get into some of that a little bit later.
And then finally, you know, what folks would think of regulating radio and broadcast television. So
the last thing I'd kind of focus on rounding this out is, you know, because communications is such a
broad term, you know, some folks may think that we have certain authority that really isn't us.
And so when people think about who regulates Facebook, that is a lot of other people,
Department of Justice, the FTC. And so, you know, there are a lot of things that we do.
And then we obviously, you know, there are things that we have jurisdiction over,
but other folks have other points. And then if you have followed the issue of network neutrality,
you know, there is obviously, you know, some fluidity between administrations on what is
the extent of the FCC's authority and what's within our jurisdiction. I think we do have
authority to enforce network neutrality rules, but some of my, in particular, Republican majority
of the FCC disagrees with me. So that's kind of a little bit of the lay of the land, as it were.
Thanks. So as you acknowledged, in more normal times, we would be, you know, meeting in person,
having this discussion live in Vegas. So we're not doing that now. We've all had to adapt in
a number of ways, moving significant portions of our lives online, including work for those who
have college or school age children. You know, a good portion, if not all of their education,
has suddenly become virtual. So I'm wondering, how has your focus at the FCC and your work
changed since the beginning of COVID? Yeah, it's a great question. You know, in some ways,
through a certain lens, you know, the Commission has continued its work. We have all been working
remotely since March. And we have had, as we're required by statute, we've had monthly open
meetings, and we're voting items, and we are proceeding with our work apace. You know, but
in a lot of other ways, in particular, the issue of digital divide, and who has broadband access
and who doesn't, has been my top priority. But that really has been amplified in a lot of ways.
The last few months have laid bare the already cruel reality of the digital divide, that
millions and millions, tens of millions of Americans don't access, cannot afford broadband
connections that they need to telework, to access telemedicine now, to help young people learn,
as you mentioned. And addressing this long-running crisis has never been more urgent. When public
health requires social distancing, even quarantining, as many of us have been doing,
closing the digital divide has become central to our safety, and certainly it's powering our
economy. And so, you know, a number of weeks into the crisis, in early March, I published
an op-ed in the New York Times calling for a connectivity stimulus. We obviously have a lot
of ways where we're talking about stimulus for public health, for our economy. I think we need
a connectivity stimulus, because regulators, industry, we have to, and need to even now more
so than ever, dramatically expand access for broadband during this emergency. Some of those
ideas that I laid out initially in March have been implemented. We are leaning into the flexible use
of wireless spectrum that's underutilized. Broadband providers have joined the fight,
waiving some data caps, the Keep America Connected pledge, opening Wi-Fi networks.
But really, truth be told, Stephanie, it hasn't been enough. And I have called for us to do more.
We are... And speaking, if I can just, speaking of doing more, I want to
specifically reference a recent, an additional op-ed, a recent one that you co-authored with
a number of prominent civil rights leaders, the Reverend Al Sharpton, Venita Gupta,
Morial, and Morita Coley. And the op-ed, for those who haven't seen it, is entitled,
Broadband Access is a Civil Right We Can't Afford to Lose, But Many Can't Afford to Have.
In that piece, you and your co-authors speak directly to how COVID-19 has exposed this digital
divide. And could you talk more about the scope of that digital divide problem?
Yeah, happy to. And like I said, the digital divide was present even before COVID-19,
but it has really been exacerbated. And I wanted to emphasize that. The fact of the matter is that
the late John Lewis, one of my heroes, said that internet access is the civil rights issue
of the 21st century. And I agree. The Communication Act instructs us to make communication service
available to all Americans without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion,
national origin, or sex. And so civil rights leaders have long held government accountable
where we have unfulfilled promises. And so closing this digital divide, I was honored,
deeply honored, to join some of those civil rights leaders talking about how, in particular,
with communities of color, we need to close the digital divide. As we outlined in the op-ed,
34% of African Americans, 39% of Latino adults, 47% of tribal groups all lack access to broadband
connection, significantly, disproportionately less so than their white counterparts.
And so when you're talking about civil rights issues, we have to have it access ubiquitous
for all. And it has to be right now. There needs to be a fierce urgency of now that we solve
these digital divide issues. And for communities of color, that means reliable and convenient access
to educational resources, to workplace materials, telemedicine, like I said.
You know, the fact of the matter is that we have... this is a rural issue in some ways,
making sure that folks get access everywhere. But the fact of the matter is that we've seen this
as well throughout the pandemic, that in densely, highly populated urban areas, there are nearly
three times as many households that remain unconnected. And that is frequently communities
of color. Over 18 million households lack broadband simply, solely, research estimates,
because it's too expensive. And so one of the things that I've called for, and have worked
with Congress on, is that for both the emergency and for the longer term, we need to have a more
affordable connection for millions of Americans to the internet. We know 50 million-plus Americans
have filed for unemployment assistance. And so making sure there is an affordable way that they
can connect to high-quality broadband is going to be important. Something else that I would talk on
really quickly here is the Lifeline program. It's the federal program specifically designed
to provide free or discounted telecom service to low-income Americans. We know that this program
is grossly underutilized. About seven and a half million Americans are on Lifeline right now,
despite over 38 million being eligible. And so we have got to make sure, for example,
we know that more Americans are on food assistance, on SNAP, right now than ever.
And if you have food insecurity issues, you probably also have digital insecurity issues.
So I've called for us to better coordinate with USDA that runs SNAP. If you are knocking on the
door for help there, we should also make sure that you get connected to the Lifeline program.
And so there's a lot of ways that we need to make sure that our government is not working
in silos right now. And I think that's really important. Sure. So these are... you've just
listed some very specific prescriptions that you and others in the civil rights community
have called for. How supportive, in your view, is Congress being? What can they do?
Yeah, you know, I think in particular, obviously, we are seeing that there is a new COVID...
I think it's the fifth part of the package that's being negotiated right now.
Broadband has still, to date, not been included in some of those congressional packages. And so
providing more money for E-Rate, another program that we have to provide money to schools. And the
fact of the matter is that how is education and schooling being performed right now? It's in
people's homes. So again, making sure that there's more money for E-Rate so that we can digitally
connect with our youngest learners, including post-secondary. Lifeline and focusing on the low
income has got to be an additional part of this dialogue. And then the third thing that I have
really focused on with folks in Congress is making sure that there is some type of an affordable
option that we are starting to think through as well in making sure that we have all houses
connected. It's past time for us to connect all Americans. And Congress is going to have to help
us out. Sure. So you started explaining the digital divide problem and then the prescriptions
for solution by referencing the civil rights icon, John Lewis. And I will just note that
that wonderful quote, access to the internet, is the civil rights issue of the 21st century,
which you said is in fact, and it's timely and a little chilling the way that you all ended your op-ed.
Yeah, I think that's exactly right. And when, you know, like I said, when John Lewis speaks,
thank God so many people listen. And so that quote from John Lewis many, many years ago is what
really kind of framed for me the ubiquity of broadband access being a civil right.
And so, like I said, was proud to partner with so many leaders on focusing on how we actually
make this thing start to happen. And in particular, like so many things that are going on right now,
both in the pandemic and also in the racial justice, not only the moment, but the movement
that we're seeing going on right now, and making sure that communities of color and the inequities
that we see with regard to broadband are part of that focus. Sure. So if I may, I'd like to switch
gears a bit and just reference the fact that there has been an ongoing debate about the extent to
which the FCC has jurisdiction over cyber security, or at least some aspects of cyber
security. There's different views on this. Can you sort of frame the contours of the debate
for us? And let us in on what side of the debate or where along its continuum you fall?
Sure, sure. Thank you. Great question. And so, you know, as you referenced in recent years,
various commissioners have expressed different views about how involved the FCC should be
in cyber security issues. During the Obama administration, I'd note, the FCC sought an
active role in cyber security. And the current chairman, of course, I would note, has been
much less involved. And so some of the differences fall on where people interpret our statutory
authority. Some of my colleagues, Republican colleagues, feel strongly that we should very
narrowly construe our instructions from Congress and, you know, only in a very limited scalpel-like
way regulate cyber security when Congress expressly tells us to. I think that is too
narrow a view. The Communication Act, in setting up the FCC's authority even long ago in 1934,
said that it was creating the FCC. We were imbued in part for, you know, I quote,
the purpose of the national defense, purpose of promoting safety and life and property,
you know, close quote, if I'm memorizing it from memory. You know, and so I think we have a
responsibility for modern networks to raise these kinds of concerns. And the FCC should have
an active role. Some of the debate is practical moving on from some of the statutory,
has been anointed with leadership, a leadership role here. And so again, some of my colleagues
would shift all of that to DHS. And I think the FCC has valuable, essential, relevant expertise
and experience that should come to bear here. And so pushing it all to somebody else,
I think does us a disservice. And so, you know, I would also kind of briefly tick through what's
going in my mind is, you know, a couple of the ways where we do have a role here. We evaluate
license applications from foreign ownership. And this includes a national security review from team
telecom. For some of your viewers who may know, cybersecurity is also part of the process of
reviewing submarine cables. And this is a critical part of how we connect data and it's transmitted
across the world. So there are cybersecurity elements there. And then something that I've
really focused on, and that is removing untrustworthy equipment from our networks.
And, you know, we at the FCC, you know, in large part, because I kind of called and beat the drum
here, is focusing on removing this untrustworthy equipment where universal service fund, again,
this is the fund that we administer at the FCC, making sure it's not used to purchase insecure
equipment, Chinese equipment for Huawei ZTE, you know, I think are really important. And then the
kind of the last thing that I would mention is, you know, we have the Communications Assistance
for Law Enforcement at CALEA. I know you have a DOJ background as well, Stephanie. And so CALEA,
and this is also coming, you know, how we establish policies and procedures to prevent
unauthorized surveillance is something that continues to kind of flare up. And I think
it's something that we need to continue to have a voice in. And I do think that issue is not going
away anytime soon. So let's say for the sake of argument that it's January 21st, 2021. And I don't
have a crystal ball in front of me. But for the sake of argument, let's say there are now three,
instead of two Democratic FCC commissioners, let's say there are three like minded Democratic FCC
commissioners. And let's say you're incredibly influential among the three. So if you have that
kind of clout and influence, what kind of cybersecurity focused initiatives or actions
would you wish the commission to take? Well, I like the question. And I will say as well,
I'm not in the prognostication business. And so I'll focus on what some of my priorities
that I'm going to continue to be talking about, regardless of future administration. And so,
you know, the first thing I would focus on is, like I said, I was the commissioner who has met
the most with the small carriers who have insecure Huawei and ZTE equipment in their
infrastructure. I came out with find it, fix it, fund it. That was we need to find insecure
equipment, we need to fix it and remediate it, and then make sure we fund it. And so the last
part of that is something that we still need to work with Congress on. And so that would be
something that I would focus on. We have not appropriated funding for the repair and replacement
part of that. As a result, you know, we do have some, you know, recipients who are lacking the
funds to maintain their networks, even though we have already prohibited them from using Huawei
ZTE. And so, you know, I would focus in, you know, in the future in January, on making sure
we open up those lines of communication and have that better funding as well. You know,
I think that has to be priority number one on a network security and cybersecurity kind of front.
The second thing I would really focus on is, you know, kind of a vision board piece that I have
been focusing on for a while now. And that is, you know, promoting network security as part of our
communication network and development, and not proposing bandaid remedies, but really kind of
being forward-looking. And where I really see this coming about is in our 5G future,
and in particular, the Open Radio Access Network, or O-RAN, solutions, and making sure that we have,
going forward, a real American role in the distribution and single system of interoperable
hardware that emphasizes software, defined functions, open interfaces, cloud hierarchy.
All of these are going to start to come together. And so from a networking standpoint, increasing
efficiency, cost-effectiveness, you know, O-RAN is also going to provide the capability for
scale and design improvements, updates at lower costs, faster timetable. And so we've got to
continue to focus on this aspect of network security. And something that I've called for
even most recently, just even as last month, is that especially when we're talking about
in a rip-and-replace world, where we are, the American taxpayers are going to be rebuilding
these networks for a lot of carriers. I think it is, I think it is time for us to make sure that
some of those carriers hear from an O-RAN option. And so I think that's going to help promote it as
a business case, as a product, and making sure that O-RAN really goes from what some in this
administration have called pie in the sky, and really making sure that that O-RAN becomes part
of our real world. I think it's going to be a part of American security going forward.
The last thing that I would kind of be on my vision board is focusing on end-user device
security. As I mentioned in particular with the digital divide, lifeline phones and providers
often have low-cost devices. And so two common manufacturers of these low-cost devices are Huawei
and ZTE. And so when you're talking about those devices, it's been revealed that sometimes they
are embedded with malware, can be encrypted multiple times. And so some of the phone's
settings and applications make it virtually impossible to uninstall. And so that's an issue
that I have focused on. I think we need to make sure that the prices that people have around
using to pay for a phone that's affordable is not compromised on some of these security and privacy
issues. I think that's unacceptable. And because the commission has control over the lifeline
program, I think we need to use that authority. We're obligated to make sure that the basic
functionality here does keep our Americans secure. The last, last thing that I would mention that
I've called for a number of times is internal changes at the FCC. We need to create a national
security task force. The fact of the matter is that these network and national security issues
and the cross-section that they have with our network issues have continued to come up. And
we need to have a better, more collaborative way that we approach these issues rather than
it being kind of whack-a-mole even at the FCC. Internal coordination has got to increase.
We cannot have inconsistent treatment on these vital issues of national security.
And again, these issues just aren't going to diminish. Quite the opposite. I think the
complexity of these issues are going to only mean that we're going to have to step up more
and deal with these with a cross-collaborative mindset.
So, sort of to close out, it seems that you are very much focused not just on national security
and privacy, but how the practices that we implement, those values, those outcomes,
do not have disparate impacts on various communities. In other words, this needs to be
a holistic approach. And frankly, you are an advocate, it sounds like, for the FCC playing
an important role at addressing these issues in a holistic way and specifically in a way
that does not have a disparate impact on communities of color.
I could not agree more. And the fact of the matter is that so many of these issues,
when you're talking about network issues and cybersecurity issues and privacy issues,
so many of these are intertwined and commingled in ways that I think the FCC
has a real role and a real voice to play. When I look at some of the surveillance issues,
when I look at some of the AI issues, some of the algorithmic bias issues,
a lot of these are having a disproportionate impact on communities of color,
on the marginalized, on the most vulnerable. And so, I'm going to continue to use my voice
and use my platform to make sure that these are issues that have a spotlight shine,
and we're working through them with policy, and we're making sure that there is equity and
digital equity that is brought to bear on a lot of these issues. So, could not agree more on that
proposition. Well, Commissioner Starks, again, I promised your staff that I would keep
time on this and not make you late for your next Zoom or call, if you will. Yes. Thank you. Thank
you so much for your time. You know, hopefully, we'll be in a very different situation as a nation
and as a world next year, and we can continue the conversation in person in Vegas. I'll look
forward to it. Always good to talk to you, Stephanie. Thank you so much. Be well.
Thank you. Bye-bye.