November 12, 2009 3:44 PM
What Will This Congress's Broadband Legacy Be?
In a cab ride home from the airport today I had a profound moment of clarity regarding broadband policy.
It was inspired by a particularly knowledgeable driver who was able to succinctly sum up the challenge broadband policy faces of whether to treat broadband as we do highways with massive public investment or if we should leave it to private providers but then lose some amount of control over what happens on these networks.
I then suggested that one of the core challenges we face in broadband policy is that while we need to be taking a long-term view of this key infrastructure, for the most part Congress tends to think about the impacts of their policies within a five-year window, too often focusing more on getting reelected than making good policy.
That's when the moment of clarity struck: My driver suggested that what Congressional types need to be doing is thinking more about their legacy than getting reelected. He made the terrific point that some day they won't be in Congress any more, and that the decisions they make in Congress are what will form their legacy and how they're remembered.
I find this notion especially salient in the context of the near-term future of broadband policymaking.
I mean, think about what's slated to happen in the next year: the end of the broadband stimulus, the release and initial implementation of a national broadband plan, the formalization of net neutrality, the reform of USF and possibly E-Rate, the upgrade of government networks and systems, and (hopefully) the optimization of all facets of society around the use of broadband.
There's arguably going to be no more significant year than 2010 in the history of broadband. By this time next year we're going to have a clear sense for what direction our country's broadband future is heading in. We'll know if Congress has decided to take bold action, or continue being satisfied with half steps. Next year is going to set the stage for decades to come.
So the question becomes: what will this Congress's broadband legacy be?
Will they be able to step beyond near-term, self-interested worries about getting reelected, or will they recognize the significance of this opportunity and set out to make policies that take into account the long-term big picture?
Who's going to step up and put the needs of people over politics? Who's going to realize that they can cement their legacy as public servants America can be proud of by becoming broadband champions? Who wants their name to go down in history as the people responsible for setting America on a new course to a better broadband-powered tomorrow?
Ever the optimist, I believe that we do have elected officials in power who can think beyond their own self interests and that respect the weight of history that comes with walking the halls of power. Now I can only hope that they follow these instincts in the coming year to not allow our country's broadband policies to be shortsighted and driven by the desire to get reelected rather than to make America great.
And I also believe that those that do step up to make the case for the need for forward-looking broadband policies will be rewarded in the short-term as well as America's hungry for some real leadership on these issues.
So to Congress, the ball is now in your court. The opportunity to establish a legacy that will last beyond the next election cycle is before you. And America's waiting and watching to see who's willing to put the long-term needs of our country first.
Comments (1)
Geoff:
I like your thinking that congress should actually do the will of the people. The problem is that there isn't a majority of people who want to spend what will likely be several hundred Billion dollars to solve this problem with public funds. Now, certainly, is not the time to ask either. If congress did that now, they would rightfully be removed at the next opportunity (well, they may be anyway).
I do agree, however, that something has to give. It's just not acceptable to have this situation continue and further separate rural America from technology and economic prosperity. What will likely have to give is the profile of communications service providers in rural America.
Contrary to conventional wisdom, neither stimulating competition nor providing cheaper backbone capacity improves Broadband distribution in many rural areas, and I believe this is where government agencies have gone wrong. Instead, the way to achieve rural Broadband Nirvana is to forcefully aggregate fully converged services (data, voice, video, etc) into dominant providers so that there is minimal duplication of efforts. This aggregation should include both served and unserved areas and as many levels of users as possible throughout larger regions. Unfortunately (or depending on your perspective perhaps fortunately) I don't think the incumbent telcos are suited to this, and I'm sure they'll squeal like pigs if they aren't part of the solution.
How you get there it the difficult question. You can force it by legislation and regulation, effectively establishing rural Broadband monopolies, or perhaps you can tinker with law and regulation to offer an unfair advantage to some type of development that can solve the problem. My preference is not to do it through tight regulation or creating exclusive utilities but rather to enable a form of development that can easily aggregate the needed level of resources and users and to minimize roadblocks to right of way.
In an earlier comment I suggested an organizational form that would fit. I'm interested to see if others would come to roughly the same conclusion without me spelling it out.
In any case, outright government subsidy of innefficient rural Broadband development is not the answer. It is, however, a quick path to a new congress!
Chuck
Posted by Charles Scott on November 13, 2009 9:38 AM