broadband infrastructure investments planned as part of the economic stimulus package need transparency if they're to be effectiveThe key public policy problem with broadband is that citizen-consumers and policy-makers still lack basic information.
Government investment in broadband networks has emerged as one of the more contentious parts of the economic stimulus legislation slated for a Senate vote Tuesday. Already, at least $2 billion of a planned $9 billion for broadband has apparently been cut from the latest bill, as legislators and interest groups squabble over who should control Internet communications funding, and under what rules.
What should be less controversial is that intelligent spending decisions about funding for high-speed Internet connections can't be made without excellent and transparent data about our broadband infrastructure.
What should be less controversial is that intelligent spending decisions about funding for high-speed Internet connections can't be made without excellent and transparent data about our broadband infrastructure.
The key public policy problem with broadband is that citizen-consumers and policy-makers still lack basic information. The Bush administration set a goal of achieving universal broadband by the end of 2007, then declared "mission accomplished" without providing much evidence to substantiate its claim. And under former Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin, the agency refused to release what data it did have about competitors in the broadband marketplace.
President Obama's commitment to "change" has included a more hands-on approach to promoting broadband. Throughout the presidential campaign, and repeatedly since the election, Obama has emphasized the importance of "expanding broadband lines across America." With input from his telecommunications advisors, the House stimulus bill included $6 billion for broadband. Early versions of the Senate measure raised the total to $9 billion.
Statistics?
Equally important is Obama's commitment to empirically-driven policymaking. In January, Obama became only the second president—after William Howard Taft in 1909—to invoke "statistics" in an inaugural address, when he spoke of "the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics."
President Obama's commitment to "change" has included a more hands-on approach to promoting broadband. Throughout the presidential campaign, and repeatedly since the election, Obama has emphasized the importance of "expanding broadband lines across America." With input from his telecommunications advisors, the House stimulus bill included $6 billion for broadband. Early versions of the Senate measure raised the total to $9 billion.
Statistics?
Equally important is Obama's commitment to empirically-driven policymaking. In January, Obama became only the second president—after William Howard Taft in 1909—to invoke "statistics" in an inaugural address, when he spoke of "the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics."
The US spends more than $8 billion a year on statistics. Much of that goes to fund the Census Bureau and data collection about agricultural and labor markets, such as the monthly unemployment report, which on Friday brought the grim news that the economy had shed 598,000 jobs in January. Last week, when the Agriculture Department released its own census, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack reminded reporters: "Numbers and data are very important. They direct policy; they shape policy. They can tell us what we are doing right. They call tell us what we are doing wrong."
Yet almost none of this $8 billion in statistical spending goes to compiling information about broadband, the infrastructure of the knowledge-based economy. And the data that has been collected has been made to mislead.
The FCC—the official record-keeper on private-sector telecommunications—for years claimed that there was adequate competition in broadband because the median ZIP code was served by eight separate providers. The Government Accountability Office's assessment of the same data found a median of two providers per ZIP code. Worse, the FCC refuses to release the information that it has about competition.
A variety of organizations—including my own free web service, BroadbandCensus.com—have stepped in to do our best at collecting, compiling and releasing public broadband information. We believe that if you want to build a road, you need a map that tells you where existing roads lie before you begin taking construction bids, let alone start pouring concrete. Where will our nation's new broadband highways, by-ways and access points be built? Who's going to let the contracts? Who will own this infrastructure?
These questions can't be answered without detailed broadband data. To that end, I've supported a proposed "State Broadband Planning and Assessment Act," which could be introduced as an amendment to the fiscal stimulus measure. The goal of this effort, as of BroadbandCensus.com, is to unleash the Internet as means of sharing information about the Internet itself.
For two-and-a-half years, I've been trying to get access to basic broadband data for the public, including citizen-consumers, businesses, and local policy-makers. I've been seeking to identify which carriers offer service in a particular ZIP code, as well as smaller units, like census blocks. In September 2006, when I headed a project at the Center for Public Integrity that investigated the telecommunications industry, we filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the FCC to force them to release basic broadband data about carriers by ZIP code.
The project obtained and displayed similar location information about broadcasters and cable operators from the FCC's cumbersome web site. But our attempts to get broadband data were thwarted by the FCC and by industry. AT&T, Verizon Communications, and the lobbying organizations representing the Bell companies, the cable companies, the cell phone carriers, and wireless broadband providers all asked the FCC to deny information to the public. Even though every consumer who buys broadband knows the name of the company that provides them with service, the telecoms argued that compiling this information into a single location would reveal "proprietary" data. The FCC agreed.
Yet almost none of this $8 billion in statistical spending goes to compiling information about broadband, the infrastructure of the knowledge-based economy. And the data that has been collected has been made to mislead.
The FCC—the official record-keeper on private-sector telecommunications—for years claimed that there was adequate competition in broadband because the median ZIP code was served by eight separate providers. The Government Accountability Office's assessment of the same data found a median of two providers per ZIP code. Worse, the FCC refuses to release the information that it has about competition.
A variety of organizations—including my own free web service, BroadbandCensus.com—have stepped in to do our best at collecting, compiling and releasing public broadband information. We believe that if you want to build a road, you need a map that tells you where existing roads lie before you begin taking construction bids, let alone start pouring concrete. Where will our nation's new broadband highways, by-ways and access points be built? Who's going to let the contracts? Who will own this infrastructure?
These questions can't be answered without detailed broadband data. To that end, I've supported a proposed "State Broadband Planning and Assessment Act," which could be introduced as an amendment to the fiscal stimulus measure. The goal of this effort, as of BroadbandCensus.com, is to unleash the Internet as means of sharing information about the Internet itself.
For two-and-a-half years, I've been trying to get access to basic broadband data for the public, including citizen-consumers, businesses, and local policy-makers. I've been seeking to identify which carriers offer service in a particular ZIP code, as well as smaller units, like census blocks. In September 2006, when I headed a project at the Center for Public Integrity that investigated the telecommunications industry, we filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the FCC to force them to release basic broadband data about carriers by ZIP code.
The project obtained and displayed similar location information about broadcasters and cable operators from the FCC's cumbersome web site. But our attempts to get broadband data were thwarted by the FCC and by industry. AT&T, Verizon Communications, and the lobbying organizations representing the Bell companies, the cable companies, the cell phone carriers, and wireless broadband providers all asked the FCC to deny information to the public. Even though every consumer who buys broadband knows the name of the company that provides them with service, the telecoms argued that compiling this information into a single location would reveal "proprietary" data. The FCC agreed.
The FCC did not want disclosure, and neither did the telecom incumbents and their lobbyists. They did not want successful broadband competition.
In its legal briefings, the FCC argued that releasing the data would lead to competition in communications—which was why it couldn't release the data! "Disclosure could allow competitors to free ride on the efforts of the first new entrant to identify areas where competition is more likely to be successful," the agency told the federal district court in Washington.
The once-vaunted virtue of competition in federal telecommunications policy—the underpinning of the 1996 Telecom Act—had taken a back seat to the privilege of supposedly proprietary information. The FCC did not want disclosure, and neither did the telecom incumbents and their lobbyists. They did not want successful broadband competition.
Congress was critical of the FCC's meager broadband statistics. In October it passed the Broadband Data Improvement Act to prod the agency to collect broadband data at a level more granular than the ZIP-code. The FCC began doing just that in June, as the bill was working its way through Congress.
But under pressure from telecom lobbyists, Congress dropped a core provision from the House version of the bill: the requirement that a separate agency, the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration, take responsibility for conducting a national broadband census and producing a public map with the names of individual carriers and where they offered service.
The House version of the stimulus bill reintroduces the NTIA broadband map. But it takes out any mention of publicly releasing individual carrier names. Worse, the Broadband Data Improvement Act enshrined the business model favored by the carriers: providing information to an entity like Connected Nation, which agrees to excise the names of broadband providers from the maps they produce.
The House stimulus bill allocated $40 million to this business model. Last week's version of the Senate stimulus bill upped the total to $350 million.
President Obama has the opportunity to make broadband a priority in his administration by ensuring that the NTIA creates a public map of our national broadband providers and infrastructure. Map in hand, the Obama administration's broadband policy should be guided by three important principles:
1) Use the Internet to empower citizens and consumers.
With the FCC keeping broadband data out of the hands of the public, I started BroadbandCensus.com to publish the same information that any consumer can know: the name of their Internet service provider and type of broadband connection, how much they are charged for service, and the Internet speeds they are promised and actually delivered. The government of Ireland publishes exactly the same information on its communications ministry web page.
Some broadband data efforts focus on the needs of telecommunications carriers and their unionized employees. Based in Kentucky, Connected Nation has been promoting their state-wide maps of broadband availability as a means for providers to sell more service. The Communications Workers of America's Speed Matters campaign has collected random speed tests from Internet users to provide a snapshot about download and upload speeds. Both of these initiatives are good, so far as they go.
But to rigorously understand the condition of broadband, we can't rely only on the information provided by the carriers. It needs to be verified by Internet users. To truly unlock the power of Internet-enabled "crowdsourcing," an effective broadband strategy must focus on citizens. Empower them by releasing basic information and letting citizen-consumers add to the mash-up. It's about making citizens contributors as well as constituents.
2) Ensure that infrastructure investment is made on the basis of cost-benefit data.
In 1790, the United States was the first country to institute a periodic national census. What started as a questionnaire seeking only demographic information had broadened by 1840 to information about employment in mining, agriculture, manufacturing, and the "learned professions and engineers." Such information has enabled our government, our universities and our business sector to rely on good-quality statistical information.
We're going to need that kind of data, and a lot more of it, to make sound investment decisions about broadband. Because of our nation's agricultural origins, our statistical agencies provide far more data about crop production than they do about broadband availability, speeds, or prices. In the absence of good data, the temptation is to make public infrastructure investment decisions based on political pressure or lawmaker influence, rather than upon solid cost-benefit analyses.
3) Use the transparency of the Internet to regulate incumbents through public disclosure.
The regulatory philosophies of the New Deal—maximum and minimum wages and prices, hands-on federal regulation—have faded and are not likely to be revived even in the current crisis. Yet one Depression-era innovation of Franklin D. Roosevelt remains as valid as ever: the disclosure-based regime of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The SEC is vigilant in requiring punctilious compliance with requirements that public companies disclose details of their operations. By and large, the SEC doesn't require substantive actions so much as it requires procedural compliance and full disclosure. Open information flows mean that poor corporate decisions are punished in the marketplace.
Equally important is that role that independent efforts, like those of BroadbandCensus.com and others, can play in collecting and aggregating public broadband data about speeds, prices, and reliability.
For more than a year, BroadbandCensus.com has provided a platform allowing Internet users to compare their actual broadband speeds against what they are promised by their carriers. We use the open-source Network Diagnostic Tool (NDT) of Internet2. All speed test data is publicly displayed under a Creative Commons license. This approach to public monitoring Internet traffic has recently been followed by Google and the New America Foundation and their "Measurement Lab" initiative, which also uses NDT.
Ultimately, broadband carriers that offer good speeds and good service will see the value in an objective and transparent broadband census. Fortunately, consumers don't need to wait on the carriers to begin collecting and publishing broadband of their own.
Neither should the government. No matter how much Congress decides to allocate to stimulate broadband, it should insist that information about speeds, prices, technologies, and specific locations of high-speed Internet availability are publicly available to all.
Congress was critical of the FCC's meager broadband statistics. In October it passed the Broadband Data Improvement Act to prod the agency to collect broadband data at a level more granular than the ZIP-code. The FCC began doing just that in June, as the bill was working its way through Congress.
But under pressure from telecom lobbyists, Congress dropped a core provision from the House version of the bill: the requirement that a separate agency, the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration, take responsibility for conducting a national broadband census and producing a public map with the names of individual carriers and where they offered service.
The House version of the stimulus bill reintroduces the NTIA broadband map. But it takes out any mention of publicly releasing individual carrier names. Worse, the Broadband Data Improvement Act enshrined the business model favored by the carriers: providing information to an entity like Connected Nation, which agrees to excise the names of broadband providers from the maps they produce.
The House stimulus bill allocated $40 million to this business model. Last week's version of the Senate stimulus bill upped the total to $350 million.
President Obama has the opportunity to make broadband a priority in his administration by ensuring that the NTIA creates a public map of our national broadband providers and infrastructure. Map in hand, the Obama administration's broadband policy should be guided by three important principles:
1) Use the Internet to empower citizens and consumers.
With the FCC keeping broadband data out of the hands of the public, I started BroadbandCensus.com to publish the same information that any consumer can know: the name of their Internet service provider and type of broadband connection, how much they are charged for service, and the Internet speeds they are promised and actually delivered. The government of Ireland publishes exactly the same information on its communications ministry web page.
Some broadband data efforts focus on the needs of telecommunications carriers and their unionized employees. Based in Kentucky, Connected Nation has been promoting their state-wide maps of broadband availability as a means for providers to sell more service. The Communications Workers of America's Speed Matters campaign has collected random speed tests from Internet users to provide a snapshot about download and upload speeds. Both of these initiatives are good, so far as they go.
But to rigorously understand the condition of broadband, we can't rely only on the information provided by the carriers. It needs to be verified by Internet users. To truly unlock the power of Internet-enabled "crowdsourcing," an effective broadband strategy must focus on citizens. Empower them by releasing basic information and letting citizen-consumers add to the mash-up. It's about making citizens contributors as well as constituents.
2) Ensure that infrastructure investment is made on the basis of cost-benefit data.
In 1790, the United States was the first country to institute a periodic national census. What started as a questionnaire seeking only demographic information had broadened by 1840 to information about employment in mining, agriculture, manufacturing, and the "learned professions and engineers." Such information has enabled our government, our universities and our business sector to rely on good-quality statistical information.
We're going to need that kind of data, and a lot more of it, to make sound investment decisions about broadband. Because of our nation's agricultural origins, our statistical agencies provide far more data about crop production than they do about broadband availability, speeds, or prices. In the absence of good data, the temptation is to make public infrastructure investment decisions based on political pressure or lawmaker influence, rather than upon solid cost-benefit analyses.
3) Use the transparency of the Internet to regulate incumbents through public disclosure.
The regulatory philosophies of the New Deal—maximum and minimum wages and prices, hands-on federal regulation—have faded and are not likely to be revived even in the current crisis. Yet one Depression-era innovation of Franklin D. Roosevelt remains as valid as ever: the disclosure-based regime of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The SEC is vigilant in requiring punctilious compliance with requirements that public companies disclose details of their operations. By and large, the SEC doesn't require substantive actions so much as it requires procedural compliance and full disclosure. Open information flows mean that poor corporate decisions are punished in the marketplace.
Equally important is that role that independent efforts, like those of BroadbandCensus.com and others, can play in collecting and aggregating public broadband data about speeds, prices, and reliability.
For more than a year, BroadbandCensus.com has provided a platform allowing Internet users to compare their actual broadband speeds against what they are promised by their carriers. We use the open-source Network Diagnostic Tool (NDT) of Internet2. All speed test data is publicly displayed under a Creative Commons license. This approach to public monitoring Internet traffic has recently been followed by Google and the New America Foundation and their "Measurement Lab" initiative, which also uses NDT.
Ultimately, broadband carriers that offer good speeds and good service will see the value in an objective and transparent broadband census. Fortunately, consumers don't need to wait on the carriers to begin collecting and publishing broadband of their own.
Neither should the government. No matter how much Congress decides to allocate to stimulate broadband, it should insist that information about speeds, prices, technologies, and specific locations of high-speed Internet availability are publicly available to all.
more.......
Guiding principles for U.S. broadband infrastructure economic stimulus
As Congressional leaders and the incoming administration of U.S. President-elect Barack Obama mull economic stimulus legislation including a portion of which is expected to be devoted to telecommunications infrastructure to boost broadband Internet access, I offer these guiding principles:
1. The focus should be on the so-called "last mile" or local access network portion of the system. There's a broad consensus that the lack of adequate broadband access in the United States is due to technological shortcomings on this segment of the telecommunications infrastructure, its weakest link. The overall goal should be full build out of this currently incomplete but vital infrastructure to serve all residents and businesses.
1. The focus should be on the so-called "last mile" or local access network portion of the system. There's a broad consensus that the lack of adequate broadband access in the United States is due to technological shortcomings on this segment of the telecommunications infrastructure, its weakest link. The overall goal should be full build out of this currently incomplete but vital infrastructure to serve all residents and businesses.
No comments:
Post a Comment