Overview
Title
To direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a council to make recommendations on ways to increase the security, reliability, and interoperability of communications networks, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H. R. 1717 wants to make a group that helps keep phone and internet networks safe and working well. This group would have smart people from different places, and they help figure out how to do it better, making sure no bad guys are part of the group.
Summary AI
H. R. 1717, also known as the "Communications Security Act," proposes that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) establish a council to improve the security, reliability, and compatibility of communications networks in the U.S. The council would be composed of representatives from trusted companies, public organizations, and various levels of government to provide advice on these issues. Reports are to be submitted every two years, and the FCC is to make these reports available to the public on its website. The bill outlines membership criteria, especially focusing on excluding any entities that could pose a national security threat.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
H.R. 1717, also referred to as the "Communications Security Act," aims to establish a council under the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). This council's primary purpose is to make recommendations on enhancing the security, reliability, and interoperability of communications networks. The bill mandates the involvement of various stakeholders such as trusted industry representatives, public organizations, academic institutions, and government entities at different levels in the council’s membership. It also requires the council to regularly report its findings and recommendations to the FCC, which will make these reports publicly available.
Summary of Significant Issues
One primary issue raised by the bill is the use of the term "not trusted," which confers significant discretion to the Chair of the FCC in deciding which entities can be part of the council. This term lacks clear, specific guidance, which could lead to arbitrary or biased exclusions of certain companies or organizations. Furthermore, the bill does not specify funding or budget details needed to support the council's establishment and operations, raising questions about its financial viability.
The council is exempt from certain termination standards that typically apply to government advisory committees, allowing it to exist indefinitely without reassessment, which may lead to concerns about accountability and fiscal oversight. Additionally, the lack of explicit criteria for appointing council members could result in appointments based on personal discretion, potentially affecting the council’s diversity and effectiveness. Lastly, while reports will be made public, there is no outlined process for how these reports will be utilized to effect change beyond mere submission and publication.
Potential Public Impact
This bill could play a crucial role in bolstering national communications security, which is increasingly significant amid rising cyber threats and international tensions. Public trust in communication networks might improve if the council implements effective security and interoperability measures.
However, the ambiguity surrounding membership and operational guidelines may hinder the establishment of a truly representative and effective council. Enhanced scrutiny and possibly contentious debates could arise concerning the criteria for exclusion of entities deemed "not trusted," which might provoke public and stakeholder concern over transparency and fairness.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For communications companies deemed "trusted," participation in this council offers an opportunity to influence and guide policy-making directly related to industry regulations and standards. However, those categorized as "not trusted" face exclusion from these discussions and potential reputational harm.
Government agencies and public organizations would also have a direct say in the measures to be adopted for securing national communications infrastructure, possibly leading to increased collaboration with the industry to address shared challenges.
Academic institutions participating in the council might benefit from access to industry data and trends, potentially enriching research and development in communications technology and security.
Ultimately, while the council has the potential to unify various stakeholders in safeguarding communication infrastructure, successful implementation will depend heavily on how the bill's ambiguities and operational details are resolved in practice.
Issues
The potential vagueness in the term 'not trusted' as used in Section 2(b)(2) and Section 2(e)(4) could lead to subjective determinations by the Chair without clear, specific guidelines beyond referencing the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act, potentially affecting which companies and entities are allowed representation on the council.
The language in Section 2(b) regarding the determination of an entity as 'not trusted' might lead to potential bias or could result in favoritism or exclusion in membership decisions. This lack of clarity may affect transparency and fairness in council member selection.
There is an absence of specific budget or funding details for the establishment and operation of the council or committee in Section 2(a), which could raise concerns about the financial feasibility and sustainability of the council.
Section 2(d) exempts the council from Section 1013(a)(2) of title 5, United States Code, potentially giving the council an indefinite lifespan without periodic reassessment of its necessity, which could result in a lack of accountability and fiscal oversight.
The lack of explicit criteria for appointment to the council in Section 2(b)(1) and Section 2(b)(2) could lead to appointments based on discretion rather than defined qualifications or requirements, affecting the competency and diversity of the council.
The possible concern with the accumulation of reports as explained in Section 2(c) raises questions about how these reports will be utilized beyond being made publicly available on the Commission's website, which could impact the effectiveness and impact of the council's recommendations.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the bill states that the official name of the legislation is the “Communications Security Act.”
2. Council on communications security, reliability, and interoperability Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill section establishes a council within the Federal Communications Commission to provide advice on the security, reliability, and interoperability of communication networks. The council must include representatives from trusted companies, public interest organizations, government entities, and must submit reports on its findings every two years, which will be made publicly available online.