At Thursday’s FCC monthly open meeting, FCC Commissioner Geoffrey Starks announced that it would be his last meeting.  In March, he said that he would be departing soon, so the announcement that he would be gone before the FCC’s next scheduled open meeting on June 26 was not a surprise.  But as one of two remaining Democratic FCC Commissioners, even though the nomination of Olivia Trusty as the third Republican Commissioner has not yet been approved by the Senate, this announcement guarantees that Chairman Carr will have a Republican majority in time for next month’s open meeting.  With that majority, what issues affecting broadcasters might be affected?

Probably highest on the list is the broadcast ownership rules.  We noted in our recent article on the ownership rules that the FCC had not yet released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking teeing up the issues that it expected to address in its 2022 Quadrennial Review – even though that review needs to be completed this year so that the 2026 review can begin on time.  As both Chairman Carr and Republican Commissioner Simington have recently been quoted as acknowledging that the current ownership rules are antiquated and in need of change to allow local broadcasters to compete with the plethora of new digital competition, a Republican majority may well make it possible for a proposal for aggressive relaxation of the rules to be advanced soon – something that might not have been possible had the Commission been locked in its partisan deadlock.

The Delete, Delete, Delete proceeding also saw many comments being filed looking to relax the paperwork burdens currently placed on broadcasters. Proposals were made to pare down the public file obligations.  These proposals included requests to eliminate the requirements for annual EEO program reports (which remain in place even though an appeals court recently rejected the FCC’s attempts to reinstate Form 395-B which would have required additional EEO reporting – see our article here about the obligations imposed by the current EEO rules and our article here about the rejection of the Form 395-B).  Other proposals questioned the Quarterly Issues Programs lists, the requirement that certain contracts be uploaded (or that a list be placed in the public file), the need for Biennial Ownership Reports and Annual Children’s Television Reports, and many other regulations that remain on the FCC’s books.  We also highlighted in our article about the Delete Delete Delete proceeding other rules that could be deleted that restrict broadcast financing and artificially limit the ability of stations to relocate their facilities to areas where they are most needed.  These, too, were raised in comments filed at the Commission.  We would expect action on many of these matters to move more quickly in a deregulatory Republican-controlled FCC.

Recently, Commissioner Simington highlighted what he perceives as a need to reform the broadcast network-affiliate relationship, proposing a cap on “reverse retransmission consent fees” where local broadcasters pay a portion of the fees that they receive from MVPDs to their networks in exchange for network programming.  Chairman Carr has also been outspoken in his beliefs about the importance of preserving and strengthening local stations.  These statements would seem to suggest that a Republican majority FCC will be examining these issues.

The Chairman has also made much of his desire to better define what the “public interest” standard means when applied to broadcast regulation.  As we noted in our article on the Fifth Circuit’s decision rejecting the FCC’s reinstatement of Form 395-B, the Court rejected the premise that the public interest standard itself provides a basis for imposing substantive regulations.  Instead, the areas in which the FCC regulates must be specified by Congress.  In other words, the public interest standard provides the FCC guidance on how they should evaluate regulations, but regulations can only be adopted on subjects specifically enumerated by Congress.  If this Circuit’s interpretation of the public interest standard is adopted elsewhere, the ability of the Commission to expand the requirements of that standard, even with a Republican majority, may be limited.

Both Republican Commissioners have also reiterated some of the goals of the broader Trump administration – including paring back the cost of government.  Simington recently proposed cutting the staff of the Media Bureau and emphasizing the development of automated systems to process routine FCC applications.  We may well see actions addressing FCC efficiency from a Republican Commission.

It is always important to remember that the future is never totally clear.  The Carr Commission has already gone in some somewhat unexpected directions – including on payola (see our article here) and on underwriting announcements by public radio (see our article here) – so predicting what else may come out of the FCC when full Republican control is in place is hard.  Watch this site, and the coverage from everyone else following the FCC, to see what comes next.