Problems with U.S. broadband networks have been evident for years. The service costs more than in many other rich nations, it still doesn’t reach tens of millions of Americans, and the companies that provide it don’t have much competition.
Now the Biden administration promises to do something about all these issues as part of the 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 it doesn’t have many important details.
But it outlines a startling new vision of activist government measures aimed at improving high-speed Internet service, after decades in which the government has left work largely to private companies.
WHAT IS THE OFFER PROPOSAL?
$ 100 billion would be spent on “future-proof” broadband as part of an eight-year infrastructure plan, which will call high-speed connections “the new electricity” that 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 extension of power lines to farms and rural communities.)
It could signal a major policy shift toward reducing the high cost of Internet service, rather than handing over money to broadband providers to build networks. “Americans pay too much over the Internet,” the plan bluntly states.
It promotes greater competition that can lower prices by encouraging and supporting networks owned or affiliated with local governments, cooperatives, and nonprofits. Currently, approximately 20 states restrict municipal broadband. Prioritizing these networks could give them a chance when the government allocates money to expand the service.
“The most important thing President Biden has done in the proposal is that he has redefined the digital divide,” said Larry Irving, a senior telecommunications official in the Clinton administration. “The mere fact of acknowledging that poverty is a greater indicator of lack of access than geography is a huge statement.”
It is unclear how the Biden administration plans to achieve this.
WHY IS IT NECESSARY?
The pandemic has made it clear that millions of Americans are offline, 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 and millions more cannot afford it.
The division persists even after the government has spent billions on encouraging broadband providers to connect remote and often isolated communities. From 2009 to 2017, federal spending on these programs amounted to $ 47.3 billion, according to a government oversight agency. report. An additional $ 20 billion aligns over the next decade for rural broadband and another $ 9 billion for high-speed wireless Internet called 5G in sparsely populated regions. Billions more flowed in broadband from the three huge relief packages enacted during the pandemic.
U.S. rural Internet policy has been a continuing mistake, said Gigi Sohn, an Obama-era FCC official. “Much of what we have is very slow,” he said. The White House now says it wants “future-proof” networks “in underserved and underserved areas,” so there is no need to rebuild them years later because they are obsolete.
Nor is it exactly what these terms mean for what is being built and where it is not being clarified, and many Republicans are opposed to putting federal funds to work in areas that have internet, albeit slow, what is called “Too much building.”
WILL THE CONGRESS SUPPORT THIS PLAN?
The $ 2.3 trillion infrastructure plan has its detractors. Some Democrats are disappointed because they wanted more. Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky called him a “Trojan horse” for tax hikes.
Internet access is a bipartisan issue, but Republican leaders on the House and Senate trade committees called Biden’s approach to broadband a waste.
Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, a Republican member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said Biden’s plan “would harm private investment in our networks without closing the digital divide.” He called for regulations on infrastructure construction to be cut to help boost investment. Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, a senior Republican member of the Senate trade, said the proposal “opens the door to duplication and excessive reconstruction.”
Congress Democrats recently introduced their own broadband legislation, including a $ 94 billion bill of Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina, the Whip of the majority of the House, who said they both endorsed the White House approach.
WHAT DOES THE BIG BROADBAND SAY?
Republican concerns echo those of industry. The NCTA cable pressure group said the White House “risks taking a serious wrong step … suggesting the government is better suited than private sector technologists to build and operate the Internet.” The NCTA also said it was concerned about price regulation. The Biden document does not mention price controls.
Jonathan Spalter, CEO of pressure group USTelecom, said prioritizing government-owned broadband investments is “exactly the wrong method,” as taxpayers will get the bill if those networks fail. He also claimed that broadband prices are already falling.
The Department of Labor says phone service prices, which include Internet plans along with phone service, have fallen by about 7% over the past decade. Internet service costs, which include web hosting, have increased by 2%. A think tank with many funds from the technology industry, New America, says prices are higher in the US compared to Asia and Europe.