Responding to an FCC notice of inquiry, three of the four top U.S. mobile phone carriers joined with wireless association CTIA in arguing against the imposition of net neutrality rules on wireless broadband providers, as they cited potential economic harms and the importance of allowing carriers to manage networks in a way that preserves their ability to offer high-bandwidth applications such as mobile TV. In a public notice issued in September, the FCC sought comment on the potential application of net neutrality mandates on wireless carriers as one of two issues (the other pertaining to managed services) that warranted further development in the agency’s open Internet proceeding. While cautioning that net neutrality mandates would negatively impact the deployment of wireless broadband facilities, which bring “incredible benefit to the U.S. economy,” CTIA pointed to a recent statement by former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt on C-SPAN in which Hundt proclaimed that, “because wireless is robustly competitive, it is the least regulated of all communications media in the U.S.” Quoting Senator Evan Bayh’s (D-IN) remark that “every policy must be viewed through a single prism: does it help the economy grow,” CTIA added: “for a market and ecosystem such as wireless that is driving investment, innovation and growth, the application of stifling new rules fails that test.” As T-Mobile USA urged the FCC to “recognize that any decisions shifting away from long-standing deregulatory policies could also have a significant impact on the global Internet marketplace,” AT&T said that only by preserving the incentive and ability of wireless carriers to offer specialized services “can the Commission maintain the broadband sector as an outperforming source of jobs and innovation in a still-struggling American economy.” Rejecting proposals that net neutrality rules should be applied equally to wireless and wireline carriers, Verizon maintained that wireline broadband operators “do not confront the challenges brought on by mobility, the same form of capacity constraints, or radiofrequency interference issues.” Public interest group Free Press lamented: “if this proceeding had demonstrated anything conclusively, it is that further proceedings will offer little, if any, additional clarity.”