Food for Thought Regarding Broadband Progress
by
Deborah Taylor Tate*
The Federal Communications Commission recently released its annual “Section 706
Report” on broadband deployment and, for the first time since the FCC began to
issue this report, concluded that broadband is not being “deployed to all Americans
in a reasonable and timely fashion.” Surprisingly, a majority of the FCC came to this
conclusion despite finding that 95% of Americans have access to broadband.
In fact, previous Section 706 Reports (issued by both Democrats and Republicans)
have extolled America’s achievements in connecting individuals over the past
decade. Today, not only do 95% of Americans have broadband access at home, but
also at school, work, and increasingly on the go. The U.S. leads in broadband at
schools, in wireless connectivity, and hotspots – most of which are free.
Additionally, the government already provides subsidies to connect schools and
libraries, low income and rural Americans, and rural healthcare providers with
regional research hospitals. Nevertheless, some Americans who do have access to
broadband decide not to use their family budget to subscribe. Just as we learned
with respect to the DTV transition, some people affirmatively choose not to utilize
these technologies, at least not early on.
Following in the FCC’s footsteps, some left-leaning organizations joined in this
unfounded criticism of America’s technological advances by decrying the state of
broadband deployment as “inadequate” or “unacceptable.” They even went so far as
to state that “other nations are passing us by.” In reality, except for a few nations
that heavily subsidize broadband (and also rank at the top of high tax nations), the
U.S. has been, and will continue to be, a global leader in broadband. Moreover,
without America’s visionary scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers, it is unlikely
that broadband or the Internet would even exist. Nor would the world be as globally
connected today without the contributions of U.S. investors and large and small
infrastructure providers utilizing all varieties of technologies.
More radical detractors of this explosive broadband growth have even compared thi
so-called lack of broadband to a lack of grocery stores. But perhaps we should take
a lesson from our government’s food and hunger policy and encourage the
detractors of our current broadband services to be part of the solution. Rather than
new indiscriminate broadband spending initiatives, perhaps certain eligible
Americans could have “broadband stamps” – after all, a similar, well-established
program called Lifeline/Linkup currently exists to support access for ordinary
telephone service.
Such “broadband stamps” would then allow certain low-income eligible citizens to
purchase broadband services on a technology-neutral basis from a cable, telephone,
wireless, or satellite provider. The stamps could underwrite a minimum broadband
package, consisting of enough “bytes” to surf the web and send emails to family
members. Then, such citizens could make their own decisions about whether they
wanted to utilize their broadband stamps for some amount of circumscribed access,
or also contribute their own hard earned cash to get a gourmet selection that might
cost them a little more, or even an even more expensive “all you can eat” bundle of
services. Still others might decide they want to use their stamps for a pre-pay
provider so they know exactly what they are getting on the front end and how it will
affect their family budget. And, with the prospect of these new subscribers,
companies might find a business model that would also incentivize the deployment
of “fast food” (faster broadband speeds) in rural, remote, and low income areas.
So rather than dictating what Americans “should” get, or what is “best for them,” let’s
let Americans decide for themselves what type of services they need for their own
families. As broadband networks continue to pour over $30 billion in private capital
per year into broadband infrastructure, at a time when the government has had to
bail-out other market sectors, maybe those who criticize the state of broadband
access should get to work on a real problem and start building more grocery stores
in low-income or blighted areas in a “reasonable and timely fashion.”
*Deborah Taylor Tate, Distinguished Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Free State
Foundation, is a former commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission
and an ITU World Telecommunication and Information Society Laureate
Facebook
Twitter