1. January 30, 2014
Hon. Fred Upton
Chairman
Energy and Commerce Committee
US House of Representatives
2125 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Hon. Greg Walden
Chairman
Communications and Technology Subcommittee
Energy and Commerce Committee
US House of Representatives
2125 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Re: Comments on Communications Act Modernization
I am a MA Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University and a full-time graduate
student of economics. Though I am only 23 years old, I am an example of someone who has
grown up with the internet. I am co-authoring a paper on the state of American broadband.
Through my five years of studying economics, I have learned about different schools of thought.
My conclusion is that democracy, though said to be the voice of the people, does not allow for
individual’s preferences to dictate winners and losers the way free-market capitalism does.
While I can vote at 18, it doesn’t mean my candidate will win. However, in a market, every
individual matters. If I don’t like the practices of a broadband provider, I do not have to
purchase their services. If the market on broadband becomes heavily regulated, then I will be
forced to buy from the companies that politicians support, even if I didn’t vote for them.
The United States has a very competitive broadband market. Intermodal competition between
DSL, cable, fiber and wireless providers is a checks-and-balances system, ranked #3 in the world
by the OECD. However, we don’t know how these technologies might combine in the future or
what new technologies will emerge. As such, the Communications Act with its regulatory silos
must go. It doesn’t reflect reality or position America for network innovation in the future.
One of the most important aspects of regulatory policy that I have learned is the benefits of an ex
post regime over an ex ante one. In other words, competition is always better than regulation.
Regulation has inherent costs, so in competitive industries, of which telecommunications is, it
makes more sense to wait for evidence of harm before acting. It brings to mind the old cliché,
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
Lately, certain Congressional representatives and federal spokespersons have used scare tactics
about problems that could potentially occur if a market/industry is not heavily regulated. This is

2. a form of manipulation of their public position that flies in the face of the evidence of the many
capital intensive industries that have transitioned from sector-based regulation to competition
regimes, including airlines and trucking. Communications is unquestionably competitive, and
can now be governed by competition law, not sector-specific regulation.
In market-based industries, the consumer gets what he/she pays for. Not all cars are the same
price, nor should broadband service be. Markets are great because they can correct themselves
through competition, whereas regulations can only be corrected with more regulation.
Additionally, consumers today are more empowered than ever. With social media tools such as
Twitter and Facebook, consumers can bring a company to its knees.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Michael Horney
MA Fellow, Mercatus Center
michaeljhorney@gmail.com