President Obama gave a speech today in Cedar Falls, Iowa on Broadband Competition. He talked about giving opportunities to entrepreneurs and small businesses throughout America. He talked about getting rid of unnecessary regulations that hinder broadband deployment and clearing the red tape. I found the following quote quite humorous though.
"What happens when there's no competition? Your stuck on hold, you're watching the loading icon spin, you're waiting and waiting and waiting, and meanwhile you're wondering how come your rates keep getting jacked up, when the service doesn't seem to improve."
Although I may be taking this statement a bit out of context, I couldn't help comparing it to the US Government and its lack of competition. As American taxpayers, we are stuck on hold, waiting and waiting and waiting. Watching our political manifestations tug the rope one way or the other, has been like an eternal pendulum lately. Our taxes keep getting jacked up and our services do not improve.
Meanwhile, our nation continues to fall behind many other nations in broadband deployment and speed. The federal government's ability to govern has been stalemated by political parties beholden to the large corporate telecommunication lobbyists, who have effectively prevented competition from blooming. Much of this dilemma can be blamed on the Telecommunication Act of 1996, which enabled a handful of corporations to dominate the airwaves and wireline infrastructure. If President Obama really wants to stimulate competition, a total rewrite of the Telecommunication Act is in order.
On one hand, Mr. President, you are correct to observe how over-regulation and legislative barriers have subdued competition and slowed improvements in broadband deployments, pricing and speed. On the other hand, you conveniently miss a factual point. Lack of competition has been caused by the lack of federal support provided to entrepreneurial and small business broadband providers in the private sector for the last decade.
WAIT A MINUTE, HOLD THE BOAT, didn't you just say and I quote, "I’m on the side of competition, and I’m on the side of small business owners". Now you are ready to give up on the private sector and begin funding government owned and operated municipal networks? You want to create competition for existing privately owned ISPs (large and small) by funding municipal broadband projects with taxpayer revenues? Why not try some of the ideas below.
There are many ways improved broadband infrastructure can be accomplished much more efficiently. We need to provide better tools which private industry can leverage quickly to improve and deploy broadband networks. These tools consist of (1) including broadband providers in pole attachment right legislation, (2) mandating 10-20% of all spectrum auctioned to be designated as unlicensed spectrum, (3) auctioning spectrum by census tracts, (4) removing voice component funding criteria from federal funding programs, (5) creating incentives to speed broadband deployment, foster competition and meet speed criteria and deployment time frames, (6) providing carrier neutral fiber access locations across the country and finally (7) creating tax incentives for capital expenditures spent on privately funded broadband networks.
I am particularly dismayed that President Obama stated, "I'm directing the federal agencies to get rid of unnecessary regulations that slow the expansion of broadband or limit competition". Really Mr. President, how can you say that, when you are planning to impose Title II regulation on the broadband industry. Excessive regulatory burdens such as Title II will decrease investment in broadband infrastructure. Are you saying that federal regulation is ok, but state regulation is not? A bit hypocritical don't you think?
Finally, you stated in closing your speech today, "We are going to clear away red tape, we're going to foster competition, we're going to help communities connect and help communities succeed in our digital economy." I say "Let's clear away the red tape, let's foster fair competition, let's help private industry connect our communities so we can ALL succeed in our digital economy, the American way!"
Meanwhile, we the American people are still waiting and waiting and waiting.
"What happens when there's no competition? Your stuck on hold, you're watching the loading icon spin, you're waiting and waiting and waiting, and meanwhile you're wondering how come your rates keep getting jacked up, when the service doesn't seem to improve."
Although I may be taking this statement a bit out of context, I couldn't help comparing it to the US Government and its lack of competition. As American taxpayers, we are stuck on hold, waiting and waiting and waiting. Watching our political manifestations tug the rope one way or the other, has been like an eternal pendulum lately. Our taxes keep getting jacked up and our services do not improve.
Meanwhile, our nation continues to fall behind many other nations in broadband deployment and speed. The federal government's ability to govern has been stalemated by political parties beholden to the large corporate telecommunication lobbyists, who have effectively prevented competition from blooming. Much of this dilemma can be blamed on the Telecommunication Act of 1996, which enabled a handful of corporations to dominate the airwaves and wireline infrastructure. If President Obama really wants to stimulate competition, a total rewrite of the Telecommunication Act is in order.
On one hand, Mr. President, you are correct to observe how over-regulation and legislative barriers have subdued competition and slowed improvements in broadband deployments, pricing and speed. On the other hand, you conveniently miss a factual point. Lack of competition has been caused by the lack of federal support provided to entrepreneurial and small business broadband providers in the private sector for the last decade.
WAIT A MINUTE, HOLD THE BOAT, didn't you just say and I quote, "I’m on the side of competition, and I’m on the side of small business owners". Now you are ready to give up on the private sector and begin funding government owned and operated municipal networks? You want to create competition for existing privately owned ISPs (large and small) by funding municipal broadband projects with taxpayer revenues? Why not try some of the ideas below.
There are many ways improved broadband infrastructure can be accomplished much more efficiently. We need to provide better tools which private industry can leverage quickly to improve and deploy broadband networks. These tools consist of (1) including broadband providers in pole attachment right legislation, (2) mandating 10-20% of all spectrum auctioned to be designated as unlicensed spectrum, (3) auctioning spectrum by census tracts, (4) removing voice component funding criteria from federal funding programs, (5) creating incentives to speed broadband deployment, foster competition and meet speed criteria and deployment time frames, (6) providing carrier neutral fiber access locations across the country and finally (7) creating tax incentives for capital expenditures spent on privately funded broadband networks.
- Legislation is badly needed allowing broadband providers easier pole attachment rights and access to public easements and conduits. Historically, access to these facilities has been granted primarily to telephone, cable, and utility companies. Voice and video services are quickly becoming standard apps on broadband networks; therefore all broadband providers should have access to these facilities.
- The majority of spectrum is auctioned to the highest bidder. While these one-time revenues are substantial, I feel it is philosophically unwise to forfeit control of one of our nation's precious resources to a few corporate giants. Haven't we already learned this lesson? While some unlicensed spectrum has been allocated, it has not been nearly enough to keep up with demand. Dramatic advances in technologies have increased wireless broadband speeds and capacities in the last few years. We are quickly approaching a time when wireless technologies rival fiber like speeds at a much lower cost of deployment. Much of this rapid advancement of wireless technology can be attributed to unlicensed spectrum, which became a low cost testing ground for wireless manufacturers and operators. It is my opinion that 10-20% of all spectrum approved for auction should be reserved as unlicensed and in the public domain. This will foster competition and innovation.
- Spectrum is normally auctioned in relatively large geographic areas. Because of the size of these areas, smaller broadband providers are prevented from participating in auctions because they cannot financially compete with corporate giants such as AT&T, Verizon and Dish Networks. Proposed FCC rules in the 3.5 GHz spectrum will be a good start if adopted, as the spectrum is slated to be auctioned by census tract. These proposed rules at least, give smaller operators a chance to acquire licensed spectrum.
- Many federal funding programs have required operators to offer voice services to qualify to be considered. As I said above, voice service is now an application of broadband and this requirement severely limits to potential awardees of these funding programs to telephone companies. Antiquated rules like this unfairly limit competition and thus slow broadband deployment progress.
- Experimental funding programs should be considered. Funding programs should create incentives for broadband providers to deploy in unserved or underserved areas quickly. One such idea which has gained little traction at the FCC is that of providing vouchers to consumers. These vouchers could be used to buy broadband service from the provider of choice. In the case where no providers exist (unserved areas), it would create a race to deploy to these areas in order to receive the voucher payments. According to President Obama, 98% of America is served. Therefore, a similar program could be created to increase broadband speeds. Additionally a low interest loan program should be set up to fund small broadband providers. Historically, loans for broadband networks have been difficult to acquire through typical funding mechanisms provided by private industry.
- There is a need for carrier neutral fiber access huts across the entire United States. Too often, access to fiber access facilities is very difficult or cost prohibitive to obtain. If the government wants to facilitate better broadband in the United States, it would be a wise investment to build, operate and maintain facilities such as these. Security concerns would need to be taken into consideration.
- Tax abatements and incentives are other tools to promote capital expenditures on broadband infrastructure. Broadband technologies are extremely dynamic. In order to keep up with the latest technologies and consumer demand, providers often replace equipment every few years at great expense. It would be prudent to reward continual capital reinvestment.
Finally, you stated in closing your speech today, "We are going to clear away red tape, we're going to foster competition, we're going to help communities connect and help communities succeed in our digital economy." I say "Let's clear away the red tape, let's foster fair competition, let's help private industry connect our communities so we can ALL succeed in our digital economy, the American way!"
Meanwhile, we the American people are still waiting and waiting and waiting.
No comments:
Post a Comment