The Federal Communications Commission recently puffed up its collective chest and attempted to demonstrate its commitment to the people it supposedly serves by voting to increase the National Broadband Availability Target from 4 Mbps down/1 Mbps up to 10 Mbps/1Mbps. Commissioners assured themselves of their importance by announcing that this will soon bring faster speeds to communities from sea to shining sea.
But if you put aside all the pompous, self-serving statements of political appointees, you will quickly realize that it’s what the FCC hasn’t done that’s far more important than its public statements.
In other words, if the FCC really wants to do something to decrease the Digital Divide and to promote faster internet service across the country, it can take one simple step:
Overturn state bans on municipal broadband networks.
Hundreds of cities in dozens of states have turned themselves into seamless wireless access zones. Their noble goals have been to make high-speed wireless a universal service for their residents. These forward-thinking cities act as wireless internet service providers (ISPs). They eliminate the need for cable companies — some of America’s most reviled companies in the survey after survey — and give their residents cheaper, faster, more dependable service. The bans that are currently in effect are sometimes take the form of outright bans, sometimes of higher taxes, and sometimes regulatory rats’ nests that have been intentionally written to make make formation of municipal networks virtually impossible.
20 states inhibit or prohibit municipal broadband networks
Unfortunately, twenty states currently have such laws that inhibit or even prohibit municipalities from doing what those previously mentioned cities have done so successfully.
Wikipedia says: “Municipal broadband offers a number of advantages to consumers and to the economy. Such networks often provide high speed Internet access more cheaply than other current broadband service providers, if not for free. Different cities adopt different models according to their needs. In the case of St. Cloud, Florida’s, a municipal broadband network offers free access to everyone as does Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Municipal broadband not only provide high speed Internet access for free it also lowers prices, creates competition, and boosts economic development. These advantages help keep prices down and networks functioning efficiently. Municipal broadband companies are faced with a constantly changing and highly competitive market with many operators. This keeps prices down and makes broadband affordable in rural and low-income communities. In a 2004 White House report, the President called for ‘universal, affordable access for broadband technology by the year 2007” and “plenty of technology choices when it comes to purchasing broadband’.”
BroadbandNow.com breaks down the 20 states into seven categories of inhibitions and prohibitions:
No Direct Sale: Arkansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Washington
Referendum (or Vote): Alabama, Colorado, Louisiana, and Minnesota
Population Caps: Nevada
Feasibility Studies: Utah
Request for Proposal: Michigan
Excessive Taxes: Florida
Let’s get specific about some of those barriers thrown up by state legislatures on behalf of cable company lobbyists.
Minnesota is one of the 20 states whose laws were written to make municipal networks impossible. According to ArsTechnica.com, “65 percent of voters must approve before municipalities can offer local exchange services or operate facilities that support communications services.”
Sixty-five percent is clearly an impossible barrier. Very few elections in this country — local, state or federal — end with 65 percent of the electorate agreeing on anything.
Then there’s Nevada. Again, ArsTechnica.com explains the Silver State’s law: “Municipalities with at least 25,000 residents and counties with at least 50,000 residents may not provide telecommunications services.”
Nevada is so sparsely-populated and its population per square mile so low outside of the Las Vegas and Reno metropolitan areas that the cost of laying fiber optic cable or creating a wireless network quickly becomes cost prohibitive. For example, a fiber optic system can be quite cost effective if it serves 1000 residences per mile of fiber installed, but cost-prohibitive if it serves only a dozen people per mile.
How about North Carolina? ArsTechnica makes it clear that laws have been written so nebulously that it quickly becomes impossible for any municipality to comply with them. “For example, public entities must comply with unspecified legal requirements, impute phantom costs into their rates, conduct a referendum before providing service, forego popular financing mechanisms, refrain from using typical industry pricing mechanisms, and make their commercially sensitive information available to their incumbent competitors.”
And down Florida way, the state “Imposes special tax on municipal telecommunications service and a profitability requirement that makes it difficult to approve capital-intensive communications projects.”
FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler: The ball is in your court
According to BroadcastingCable.com, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler’s heart seems to be in the right place. Chairman. Like Daniel entering the lion’s den, he spoke to the Cable Show industry confab in April 2014 and put attendees on notice by saying that intends to “preempt state laws that ban competition from community.”
Well, Chairman Wheeler, this is one of those cases where actions speak louder than words. Much louder.
The Digital Divide still exists. It’s as big a problem as ever. We know you’ve only been on the job since November 2013, but that’s plenty of time to realize that the time for talk is past and the time for action is upon us.
Do it. Do whatever you need to do to preempt those state laws now. Overrule the deep-pocketed lobbyists working for the cable industry and make it possible for more municipalities to really eliminate the Digital Divide. Millions of desperate Americans are counting on you.
Paula Adams says
Had my daughter and I been afforded this when my granddaughter suffering from dyslexia stared school, she would knot be as far behind as she is!! We were all born and raised in the isa and have paid taxes since the beginning of our time here. Wwe are together as a family of4 and previously 2 other grandchildren resided here. The school system dropped the ball and had we been online she could have had scottish rites tutoring and accessibility to devices and aids to help her learn easier