| The Broadband Plan, Early March |
| Written by Dave Burstein |
|
Update March 17: Mostly on target. Microsoft/Dell and the carriers have held off on their discount plans. Original The U.S. broadband plan accomplishes very little for affordability, quality, speed, or availability of broadband in the U.S., although it has other important achievements I describe below.
In particular The “100 megabits to 100 million homes” is right on target for what will be achieved by 2015 without any broadband plan. (FCC/Columbia CITI November 2009). Based on cable company's official statements, I reported in August 2009 102 million homes would have 100 megabit capable DOCSIS by around 2013. http://bit.ly/c7jMuJ Fewer than 4% of U.S. homes that can only get satellite (“unserved”) will be reached because of the plan. It's more likely only 1-2% of homes will be upgraded. Broadband prices are more likely to increase than decrease because of the plan, especially if a multi-billion dollar Internet tax is included. There's nothing wrong with taxing the Internet like anything else, but this “fee” goes to the shareholders and bondholders of phone companies, not re-opening closed hospitals. Only a small fraction of the poor will get substantial help according to the best information I can find. In particular, the much-touted cable A+ plan provides “back of the bus broadband” throttled to a tenth the normal speed, available to less than one in five of the poor, and actually more expensive than Verizon's recent promotion. AT&T has offered similar, but I don't know if it's included. Since nearly all mobile phones will include broadband in a few years and far more than 90% of families have a mobile phone, the 90% take rate in 2020 would almost certainly be achieved without the plan, probably several years earlier. I sent the data above to Julius for factchecking. He sent back no contrary facts. http://bit.ly/9v0dRM Expected but not yet announced
Everyone who hasn't seen the plan is still asking “What's in it.” The Wall Street Journal and Washington Post today had apparently contradictory stories despite probably getting their leaks from the same sources. Most of it is public already if a reporter digs. I've based the on public statements and non-FCC sources, not “leaks” from the FCC. Expect a few errors. Highly likely to be included: Microsoft and Dell will have a computer discount program probably implemented by One Economy and Connected Nation. “Lifeline broadband” will be called help for the poor but could be corporate welfare in disguise Discounts on service from the cablecos (A+) and probably AT&T. A+ as announced is a shallow pr exercise to prevent real price drops. USF totally re-focused, with the recipients being pushed to convert to all IP. Free.fr, Verizon FiOS, and AT&T U-Verse are showing how for much less expensive IP networks can be compared to the PSTN. Most details not yet announced, but there's an internal push to use the broadband plan to reduce some of the obvious waste in the program. A focused program for the last 3-5% that will include wireless. Most of the remaining “unserved” are so scattered there is no easy way to reach them except through the existing local telco or cableco. Satellite (5 megabit, somewhat reduced latency) for the last 1% or so very expensive to reach with terrestrial broadband. $91K/home for Hawaiian politicians and Sandwich Islands illustrate how USF can be wasteful/abused, and they are trying to avoid similar. Note that serving 1% by satellite reduces the $20-35B estimates in September possibly in half. The $350B, beloved of lobbyists and uninformed reporters, never was on the table. Some school and library program put forth in the name of broadband adoption. Some transfer of spectrum from defense etc. to commercial, but this could be minimal Pole attachment and other rules that are important but I don't understand E-rate and ideally USF spending details made public on the web, including improved public bidding for e-rate contracts Proposals on better but not complete disclosure of the details of different carrier’s broadband offerings Good chance for inclusion: Rule changes on spectrum use for efficiency, probably limited Special access pricing for rural backhaul. Speaker after speaker talked of rural prices of $100-$200/megabit where competition is weak compared to $5-15 across most of the developed world. This is by far the most effective way to help rural areas without taxpayer money, so I've pressed hard for it. (Below) ICC (InterCarrier Compensation) for companies changed with unclear details. Should be included: Measures taking advantage of the 10 year term of wireless licenses, the easiest way to near-universal service and more competition. Jonathan Adelstein was the first voice I heard for “use it or lose it.” Use of antitrust with the duopoly Some actions likely to substantially reduce prices during Obama's administration. Very, very few of the recommendations are expected to have an impact before 2015 or so. Some announced features
Very little of substance on better broadband for more people, but plenty of moves in other areas, many admirable. This is here $18B for “interoperable public safety everywhere.” If done right, the everywhere part will include erecting towers for nearly all the last 3% of homes. A small increase in e-rate for schools and libraries. (Inflation based on CPI) Universal service funding will not be increased. That can't be done while giving the telcos what they expect from non-rural, broadband lifeline, Fairpoint/Iowa/Puerto Rico, “middle mile RLEC funding” and other parts of the program. Some program for spectrum resale, especially by broadcasters. Some limits on local government right of way, etc. A universal service goal of 3-5 megabits. (Does that include connections for the poor?) “Universal digital literacy so that all of our kids have the tools they need to learn and compete in a 21st century economy.” 100% digital literacy would be particularly remarkable considering that our current educational system results in only 86% of Americans functionally literate by one government estimate. E-care pilots that evaluate cost savings & clinical outcomes. Beneath the rhetoric, most telehealth and electronic medical records programs have not done well. Legendary Harvard Medical Professor Jerome Groopman is eloquent on how the claims for e-health are exaggerated. http://bit.ly/aFgpWt Ensure patients have access to and control over their health data. Sounds great to me. Require participating institutions to meet outcomes-based performance measures Consider open license as option for federal investments. Good idea. USF: Develop standards for financial data transparency USF: Create an online RFP broadcast service to increase market information. Done right, this can dramatically save money on e-rate. Open federal NETWORX contracts to state and local governments Target federal funding to areas where broadband solutions are outcomes-oriented and holistic Explore extending outage reporting to broadband service providers |
