The FCC is about to begin an inquiry into the possibility of a singular ratings system that would apply to television, game, and phone media. 
 
I've seen some discussion of this among gamers, and most of them do not seem to understand the problems that this would present.  While a single system might have an ostensible charm, allowing the FCC to continually overstep its bounds would be an egregious error.  Personally, I think the FCC has no business regulating content at all (they should stick to licensing).  Their penchant for meddling with what we're allowed to see on broadcast television, though, has a fair amount of legal precedent.  Do we really want to allow precedent for even more involvement?
 
On the other end of the spectrum, many are decrying censorship, game banning, and other such far-fetched ideas.  In all likelihood, such a system would operate much like the TV ratings (i.e. voluntary and determined by the networks themselves).  What this would probably mean for the game industry is a standardized system of ratings that carry no legal weight whatsoever and a likelihood of mandated parental controls for hardware.  The ratings could potentially be selected by the publishers, but would most likely be utilized by the ESRB.  
 
It is remotely possible that the commission would entertain an enforced ratings system, but such an idea would never fly and shouldn't be a major concern. 
 
Content rating has numerous flaws as-is (namely the absurd tolerance for "death-ratings"), however they have one strength that should be protected vigorously - independence.  Consoles already have parental controls in response to market pressure.  The demands of the people are being reasonably met, and there is no reason to tolerate a government entity clumsily crashing a working system.