Problems with US broadband networks have been evident for years. The service costs more than in many other rich nations, still less than tens of millions of Americans, and the companies that offer it do not face too much competition.
Now, the Biden administration promises to do something about all these issues as part of its proposed $ 2.3 trillion infrastructure package.. The plan, which would dedicate $ 100 billion connecting all Americans is more of an idea than a policy and does not have many important details.
But it outlines a striking new vision of activist government measures aimed at improving high-speed internet service, after decades in which the government has largely left the task to private companies.
WHAT IS THE TENDER PROPOSAL?
It would spend $ 100 billion on “future” broadband as part of an eight-year infrastructure plan, calling high-speed connections “new electricity,” which is now a necessity for all Americans. (For history buffs, this is a reference to the Rural Electrification Act – Depression-era legislation that accelerated the expansion of power lines farms and rural communities.)
It could signal a major policy shift towards lowering the high cost of internet service, rather than just handing over money to broadband providers to build networks. “Americans pay too much for the Internet,” the plan says.
It promotes greater competition that could reduce prices, by encouraging and supporting networks owned or affiliated with local governments, cooperatives and non-profit organizations. Currently, about 20 states restrict municipal broadband. Prioritizing such networks could give them a bit of a foothold when the government provides money to expand the service.
“The most important thing about what President Biden did in the proposal is that he redefined the digital divide,” said Larry Irving, a senior telecommunications official in the Clinton administration. “The mere act of acknowledging that poverty is a greater indicator of lack of access than geography is a huge statement.”
It is not clear how the Biden administration intends to do this.
WHY IS IT NECESSARY?
The pandemic has made it clear that millions of Americans are not online, a problem not limited to rural areas areas, but also includes cities. The White House says more than 30 million Americans do not have high-speed internet access at all, and millions more cannot afford it.
The division persists even after the government has spent billions encouraging broadband providers to connect remote and often isolated communities. From 2009 to 2017, federal spending on such programs totaled $ 47.3 billion, according to a government watchdog. report. Another $ 20 billion is aligned over the next decade for rural broadband and another $ 9 billion for high-speed wireless internet called 5G in sparsely populated regions. The additional billions circulated in broadband from the three huge aid packages adopted during the pandemic.
US rural internet policy has been a continuing mistake, said Gigi Sohn, an Obama-era FCC official. “A lot of what we have is very slow,” she said. The White House now says it wants “future-resistant” networks “in underserved and underserved areas,” so they don’t have to be rebuilt again years later because they’re outdated.
Exactly what these terms mean for what is being built and where it is not clear, and many Republicans are opposed to federal funds operating in areas that have the Internet even if it is slow – what is called “overload.”
WILL CONGRESS SUPPORT THIS PLAN?
The $ 2.3 billion infrastructure plan has its detractors. Some Democrats are disappointed that they wanted more. On the other hand, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky called him a “Trojan horse” for tax increases.
Internet access is a bipartisan issue, but Republican leaders in the House and Senate trade committees have found Biden’s approach to broadband to be wasteful.
Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, a Republican member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said Biden’s plan would “affect private investment in our networks without actually closing the digital divide.” She called for a reduction in infrastructure construction regulations to help boost investment. Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, a senior Republican member of the Senate Commerce Committee, said the proposal “opens the door to duplication and exaggerated construction.”
Congress Democrats recently introduced major broadband legislation, including a $ 94 billion bill from Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina, House Majority Whip, who both said they approved of the White House’s approach.
WHAT DOES HIGH BROADBAND SAY?
Republican concerns are green to industry. The NCTA cable lobby group said the White House “risks taking a serious wrong turn … suggesting the government is better suited than private sector technologies to build and operate the Internet.” The NCTA also said it was concerned about price regulation. The Biden document does not mention price control.
Jonathan Spalter, CEO of the USTelecom lobby group, said that prioritizing government-owned broadband investment is “exactly the wrong approach” because taxpayers will be billed if such networks fail. He also claimed that broadband prices are already falling.
The Department of Labor says that prices for telephone services, which include internet plans along with telephone services, have fallen by about 7% in the last decade. The cost of internet services, which include things like web hosting, has risen by 2%. A much-funded think tank in the technology industry, New America, says prices are higher in the US compared to Asia and Europe.