Trump’s Influence Exposed at FCC Hearing as Agency’s Independence Fades

The independence of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) came under scrutiny during a recent Senate Commerce Committee hearing, where Chair Brendan Carr faced questions about the influence of Donald Trump on the agency’s direction. Carr’s testimony raised alarms about the erosion of the FCC’s original mandate to protect public interests, as he indicated a willingness to comply with pressure from the White House regarding media companies.

For over 130 years, independent agencies in the United States have played a crucial role in regulating complex systems that Congress cannot oversee alone. However, recent actions by the FCC signal a troubling shift toward increasing presidential control. The hearing, the first oversight session of the FCC in five years, revealed Carr’s reluctance to assert the agency’s independence, particularly when pressed by Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey, who emphasized that Carr’s accountability lies with the American public, not the president.

During the hearing, Carr suggested that Trump could dismiss him “for any reason or no reason,” which raises questions about the agency’s operational integrity. He declined to affirm that it would be inappropriate for the White House to exert pressure on him regarding actions against media outlets. This lack of clarity on Carr’s commitment to independence was underscored when, shortly after he stated the FCC is not independent, the agency’s website removed the term “independent.”

Carr, who has been involved with the controversial Project 2025, has transformed the FCC’s long-dormant news distortion standard into a mechanism for intimidating broadcasters critical of Trump. This shift has led to the reopening of complaints against major networks like CBS, ABC, and NBC, as Carr has threatened local affiliates with license revocation if they do not align with the administration’s narrative.

The hearing also highlighted Carr’s past statements about enforcing the “public interest standard.” Notably, the FCC has not revoked a broadcast license under this standard in over three decades, since the repeal of the fairness doctrine in 1987. Critics argue that Carr’s portrayal of himself as a neutral enforcer of established law contradicts his actions, which seem politically motivated.

Carr’s ascent within the FCC can be traced back to bipartisan support, as he was nominated three times and confirmed unanimously by the Senate each time. President Joe Biden re-nominated Carr, believing in the sincerity of his claims regarding independence and free speech. This belief, however, has been called into question, as Carr’s actions suggest a departure from those principles.

The Biden administration’s attempts to reform the FCC have faced significant obstacles, particularly from within the Democratic Party itself. Efforts to appoint Gigi Sohn, a progressive telecommunications reformer, were thwarted by moderate senators, further complicating the administration’s ability to enact meaningful change. As a result, the FCC has become increasingly aligned with the executive branch, undermining the foundational principles of independence that were meant to safeguard the public.

While Biden successfully navigated the country away from economic collapse in 2021, his legacy now also includes a failure to prevent the rise of authoritarianism within regulatory agencies. This ongoing struggle highlights the dangers of misplaced trust in political norms, particularly when faced with an opposition party that has shown a willingness to undermine democratic institutions.

The implications of Carr’s testimony and the FCC’s transformation extend beyond regulatory frameworks; they touch upon the broader health of American democracy. As the agency shifts further away from its original purpose, questions remain about the future of independent oversight in a political landscape increasingly dominated by partisan interests.