Meetings; Sunshine Act
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Meetings; Sunshine Act
- Posted
- Jul 21, 2026
- Comment period
- Jul 21, 2026 – ?
- FR Doc
- 2026-14674
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Stance breakdown
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Issues are identified as comment analysis progresses — nothing tagged on this document yet.
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- May 22, 2017Consumer Advisory CommitteeAnalysis pending📎 AttachmentRead comment →
- Jun 2, 2017Anne PappalardoSupportIndividualRead comment →
- Jun 2, 2017Ingrid Willenz-IsaacsOpposeIndividualRead comment →
- Jun 2, 2017Joana GomesOpposeIndividualRead comment →
- Jun 2, 2017Jondi WhitisSupportIndividual
The commenter supports the proposed action to regulate robocalls, describing it as a necessary protection against an invasion of privacy. They also express strong frustration with the FCC's perceived failure to address media monopolies and advocate for stricter penalties for telemarketers.
Read comment → - Jun 2, 2017Robert E. CoxSupportIndividualRead comment →
- Jun 2, 2017Steve ReidOtherIndividualRead comment →
- Jun 2, 2017Lucille BryantOpposeIndividual
An individual is expressing extreme frustration with frequent telemarketing calls and is urging the agency not to allow telemarketers to use answering machines. The commenter argues that these calls are aggravating and intrusive.
Read comment → - Jun 2, 2017William LaskeyOpposeIndividual
An individual is opposing the proposed robocall bill because they are concerned that robocalls leaving voicemails will cause their phone to ring repeatedly, making it harder to ignore them.
Read comment → - Jun 2, 2017larry r. walkerOtherIndividualRead comment →
