Many of us who became bloggers did so to keep politicians honest. As that pertains to our Republican Senator Chuck Grassley, it seems to be getting more difficult these days. Let's just peruse the docket of recent Grassley behavior as summarized by Howie Klein at Down With Tyranny:
Grassley viciously attacked Office of Legal Counsel chief Virginia Seitz because he doesn't like an opinion of hers– something even a former Bush appointee to this position, Jack Goldsmith, referred to as “name callling” and “misplaced.”
He was so rude to the victims of the massacre in Tuscon a year ago that they sent him a letter demanding an apology. And recently the hacker group Anonymous saw him as such a corporate shill for SOPA and PIPA that out of all the corporate whores whose Twitter accounts they could have hacked they thought Grassley's made the most sense.
Quite a list. But, as Howie points out, it gets even worse, when considering the shameful way he played the role of the demagogue in his witch hunt conducted at the expense of telecom company Lightsquared:
Without getting too much into the technical aspects of this fight, a small company, Lightsquared, wants to provide Americans with more options in their telecom choices. But major GPS players claim that their signal is being distorted by the Lightsquared signal, so they used the post-9/11 fear tactics we've gotten to know so well, warning Americans about “planes falling out of the sky” so they wouldn't have to participate in fixing this problem–and could make Lightsquared go away. Here is Harold Feld of Public Knowledge, a well-respected authority on spectrum challenges, on this problem:
Now make no mistake, Grassley's smears of Lightsquared, as Democratic Party crony capitalism, as dangerous to GPS, have actually led a staff member at the FCC to refer to what he's doing as
“McCarthyism.”
So why is he trying to destroy a company that will create more telecom competition, generally a very good thing in our almost monopolistic system? That would be a good question to ask the Senator. You might want to also ask him why he doesn't devote the same level of due diligence to his backers who stand to benefit from this. For example, Deere & Co, his #4 financial backer, who is
being investigated for violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act for bribing officials abroad.
So
give the Senator a call and be polite. But firmly ask these questions, as they need to be answered if there to be any transparency when it comes to his recent bizarre actions.
Disclosure: I am not an official for Lightsquared. I am also not being compensated for this. As a long-time tech enthusiast, though, I am a big believer in the idea of expanding broadband access to all, especially in rural areas, so that all have an equal opportunity to access the greatest storehouse of human knowledge and wisdom: the open Internet.
LATE UPDATE from desmoinesdem: the FCC withdrew its preliminary approval to LightSquared. I posted Grassley's statement in the comments.
7 Comments
I haven't followed this controversy
for other perspectives on the Senate investigation, see here and here. A House subcommittee held a hearing on this issue yesterday.
I’m posting some of Grassley’s statements on Lightsquared below.
desmoinesdem Thu 9 Feb 7:55 PM
Grassley's side of the story
“Q & A” released by his office on December 9, 2011:
He confirmed on December 8 that he would block confirmation of two FCC nominees over this controversy:
desmoinesdem Thu 9 Feb 7:59 PM
one more statement from Grassley
After reading the letter and the attachments, it sounds to me like Grassley is raising some reasonable questions. For what it’s orth, Lightsquared has said Ruelle never worked for them.
I have no clue about the technical side of this–what Harold Feld said in the video you posted sounded reasonable, but I don’t have the expertise to know out whether tests on GPS interference were rigged, as Lightsquared claims.
desmoinesdem Thu 9 Feb 8:18 PM
Lightsquared vs. GPS
I am no fan of Senator Grassley, but in this case I think he is actually working in the best interests of Iowa and the nation.
I have worked in the GPS industry for nearly two decades. I am also familiar with the testing that was done on many types of GPS receivers to measure the effects of the proposed Lightsquared emissions on receiver performance. The test results were not rigged– Lightsquared’s proposal would have serious implications for GPS reception and GPS is now a key part of our infrastructure in ways that most people do not realize.
Lightsquared proposes to use spectrum adjacent to the GPS band that is currently used primarily for space-to-earth transmissions, which are at extremely low power levels on the surface of the earth and so do not cause interference with GPS. Lightsquared’s proposal is for high power terrestrial transmission of broadband data in this band, at levels never contemplated by any receiver manufacturer. I am all in favor of trying to expand the availability of broadband services, but Lightsquared’s proposal was fast-tracked through the FCC’s regulatory process, so that there was essentially no opportunity to comment. (Allegedly because of connections with the Obama administration.)
The testing of the original Lightsquared proposal showed that there would have been severe degradation in the use of GPS in large areas surrounding their transmitters. Lightsquared implicitly acknowledged this fact by modifying their proposal to give a bigger spectrum buffer to GPS. However, many existing receivers would still be adversely affected by this modified proposal. There is some truth to Lightsquared’s assertion that GPS receivers could be designed to tolerate the emissions of this revised proposal, but this is changing the ground rules for literally tens of thousands of GPS receivers, many functioning in safety of life or critical infrastructure applications.
I don’t think that Lightsquared set out to damage GPS. But I do believe that over the past few administrations that the FCC has become beholden to political and money interests, while being hollowed-out technically, thus allowing a flawed concept to go forward without adequate review.
crdem Thu 9 Feb 11:11 PM
Well, good luck
Tom Harkin is also a signatory to the May letter to the FCC questioning the waiver and asking for it to be rescinded. Unsurprisingly, so are a number of Democratic US Senators from the Midwest.
Deere’s precision agriculture is an incredible feat and is one of the areas where the US is a leader. Those who are interested can read more here.
The truth is that the interference in the GPS signal “is a result of GPS devices receiving signals from outside of their designated frequencies.”
If this is the truth, then what do you propose? GPS is an entrenched system. I do not agree with the attitude of “not getting into technical aspects,” while shouting about contributions from Deere.
As a consumer, I have no bone to pick with Lightsquared’s model — in fact, I see benefits. However, when you have Deere and nine govt agencies, including the DOD mad at you and claiming interference after testing, I’d be careful about making this all about Grassley.
If your DC-based consultancy is blogging on behalf of any interested party, you should disclose in fairness to all.
albert Thu 9 Feb 9:04 PM
I have asked the author
to update the post clarifying whether he is blogging on behalf of an interested party.
No elected official from Iowa in either party is ever going to take a public stand against Deere’s interests.
I don’t know about the technical side. Both “conspiracies” sound plausible to me–the idea that LightSquared bought favors from the FCC and the idea that big GPS companies bought skewed tests and favors from other government agencies.
desmoinesdem Fri 10 Feb 7:41 AM
Grassley statement of February 15
desmoinesdem Wed 15 Feb 11:41 AM