RSSStimulus package contains broadband open access provisions
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published January 28, 2009, 3:59 PM
A legislative measure to fund broadband deployment in rural and underserved areas is one of the attachments to the hotly debated economic stimulus package.
A chunk of the economic stimulus package being debated on Capitol Hill, and whose initial votes are happening now, would empower the Commerce Dept. to direct its NTIA division to provide federal grants to businesses that build out broadband service in underserved regions of the country.
Granted, the NTIA will be directed to perform a study to determine just what "underserved" means in the modern context. But an amount currently reported at $6 billion could be reserved for so-called Wireless Deployment Grants. Among the major restrictions:
- 75% of the grant money will be reserved for providing broadband data service, with the remainder allocated for broadband voice
- "Basic broadband service" is being defined as a 5 Mbps minimum downstream connection, with "advanced broadband" at 15 Mbps. Previously, the government defined a broadband connection as slow as a 160 Kbps.
- Grant recipients will be limited to providing service under so-called "open access rules," though the bill as currently drafted delegates the authority for defining those rules to the FCC.
The NTIA would then be charged with the creation of something called a "National Broadband Plan," which is similarly foggy in nature. But the idea is apparently to determine a way to blanket the nation, including underserved regions, with efficient broadband service such that Americans have access to the Internet wherever they go. A read of the current language indicates that this is not a "free broadband" scheme as some have mistaken it to be, but rather a way of enabling all parts of the country access to service, even if it's commercial service.
In a blog post yesterday, Public Knowledge communications director Art Brodsky sounded a modest note of approval for the measure, but cautioned folks specifically about what the bill is not -- at least, not yet.
"Whether the FCC is led by interim Chairman Michael Copps, or by the presumed Obama Administration appointee, Julius Genachowski, the Commission will have a chairman attuned to the notion of an open network," Brodsky wrote. "One can't take anything for granted, but as the situation looks favorable at the moment. It's important to understand that open access isn't Net Neutrality, and it's certainly not the wide-ranging, basic Net Neutrality for which we continue to push. Open access has its own merit as a mechanism for creating new competition and should, as with Net Neutrality, be applied more widely as they had been before 2005 when the FCC closed off access to networks by competitors to incumbent telecom and cable companies."
Brodsky went on to remind readers that the existence of open access rules could certainly turn private interests off of the idea of applying for grants, as they did during last year's massive FCC spectrum auction, which left the open-access-protected D-block unsold.
i don't think this should be in the stimulus package.
however, we must also be mindful that the stimulus package should not be inclusive of the regular spending that is done each year and vital to sustain programs that are in affect, that is until the ineffective ones are weened out.
for example, we can do without the condoms and std programs, because if these kids who don't have enough sense or food for themselves, get knocked up, then they should suffer the consequences for making horny choices.
on the other hand, which would be cheaper?
to supply condoms and prevent stds or to feed the little bas****s via welfare or provide healthcare to medicate infections, both of which are life time commitments for the feds.
Score: 2
|Making it profitable to serve America's "last mile" could spark significant economic activity. Reduced labor cost isn't the only reason all our tech jobs are going to the third world - ubiquitous internet is also a major factor. Consider all that online media vying for consumer dollars. You can't very well take advantage of streaming music, video and other downloadable content if you're stuck on dial-up. Then there's telecommuting and VPNs, hotspots and other services that city dwellers take for granted. If private enterprise still chooses not to take advantage of these grants they could always be reallocated.
Score: 0
|They'll be reallocated no matter what.
I can guarantee this money will go into the "General Fund", as do most "grants" of this type. Meaning it ends up getting spent on roundabouts, walking bridges, and city parks...none of which will give any kind of financial return.
Score: -1
|Nice a national P2P network..
Score: 1
|This is not an economic stimulus, and shouldn't be in the bill. But we have the Democrats (and crazy Grandma Pelosi) running the show now, so I guess we'll have to get used to wasting lots of money.
Score: 0
|"Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?" asked Stephanopoulos.
"Well, the family planning services reduce cost," said Pelosi. "They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those -- one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government."
"So no apologies for that?" asked Stephanopoulos.
"No apologies," said Pelosi. "No. We have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy. . . ."
Let's see..."condoms" and "stimulus" in the same sentence...It could be worse, it could be "Pelosi" and "stimulus" in the same sentence.
And to think she missed an opportunity to argue for forced sterilization...
Yup, ..."change"... LOL!!!
Nope! No social engineering here! Let's see...left wing liberals versus the social right wing liberals...the only difference is their self-righteous platitudes come from different books.
Who would have guessed that George Stephanopoulos would be the one to ask House Speaker Nancy Pelosi about it on ABC's "This Week."
Score: 2
|I'm guessing you live in an area where broadband is available. This would provide businesses, mostly small businesses, with contracts thus creating jobs. This is economic stimulus, but since the large telecoms could care less about expanding to a small market, and their GOP cronies know this. They know this will not benefit them. They would rather spend the revenue for a bail-out.
Score: -1
|@ foxfyre (Gawd, I hate the comments section now)
The good news? I did hear that they are trying to push through a reduction in Business Taxes. Sure, it's probably not nearly enough, and likely way too late to do much good for the millions of folks who've already lost jobs, but more money the businesses can hang on to means businesses recapturing some of those lost employees and possibly (if it's big enough and lasts long enough) even expand and grow.
The same applies to our personal income taxes. Can't remember the name of the theory at the moment, but it goes along the same lines. There's a point where cutting taxes actually increases government revenue by growing other areas of the economy and getting more people employed. If they aren't looking into this as well, they're going to be hurting big-time a year or so down the road when unemployment becomes seriously threatening to their coffers.
Score: 1
|@ Derrecho DeVia
There's no return. It's not an investment, it's a stop-gap at best, and a "symbolism over substance" (as foxxy would say) PR stunt at worst.
The money in the grant goes to the companies, pays the employees...and when that runs out...it's gone. The funding, the jobs, the growth.
And where did it come from to begin with? Ah yes...you and the businesses.
But hey, we can ignore the fact they took it from us to begin with so long as they give some meager portion of it back as "stimulus", right??
Amazing how the economy ever survived without broadband 10 years ago...
Score: 0
|