Bruce P. Mehlman

Bruce Mehlman is a leader in Washington DC, helping Fortune 500 companies and innovative start-ups understand, anticipate and navigate the public policy environment and trends likely to impact the global marketplace through the bipartisan lobbying firm he founded, Mehlman Vogel Castagnetti.  He concurrently serves as Executive Director of the Technology CEO Council and Co-Chairman of the Internet Innovation Alliance.

Mehlman previously served as Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Technology Policy.  At Commerce Mehlman worked closely with leaders from industry, federal labs, universities and governments on issues impacting technology creators and users including innovation policy, broadband, biotechnology, tech-led economic growth, technology transfer, nanotechnology and workforce policy. 

Mehlman worked as telecommunications policy counsel for Cisco Systems, policy director and general counsel to the House Republican Conference under Rep. J.C. Watts (R-OK), general counsel to the National Republican Congressional Committee, and as a commercial litigation attorney in a major Washington law firm.  He serves on the Board of One Economy Corporation, and the Advisory Boards of the NanoBusiness Alliance and the Princeton Plasma Physics Lab.

The Road Ahead

By Bruce

I applaud the FCC for presenting an ambitious plan that sets goals for greater broadband availability, adoption and speeds — all key to the advancement of our economic, health care and educational systems. 

The National Broadband Plan both highlights a decade of success and innovation in Internet technology and lays out the work that remains ahead. It has been estimated that hitting the targets outlined in the plan, including at least 90 percent broadband adoption by 2020, could cost as much as $350 billion. This plan could be powerful and positive provided strict new regulations are not imposed to undermine investment. 

Previewing the Plan

By Bruce

Over the weekend, the Washington Post published an editorial by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in advance of the FCC’s National Broadband Plan:

Our nation is at a high-tech crossroads: Either we commit to creating world-leading broadband networks to make sure that the next waves of innovation and business growth occur here, or we stand pat and watch inventions and jobs migrate to those parts of the world with better, faster and cheaper communications infrastructures.

This, of course, is not a choice—which is why, this week, at the behest of Congress and the president, the Federal Communications Commission is delivering the first National Broadband Plan: a comprehensive strategy for dramatically improving our broadband networks and extending their benefits to all Americans.

On a related note, today the FCC has released the Executive Summary for the National Broadband Plan, available here in a PDF.

A Day Early

By Bruce

In a surprising move — for government, anyway — the FCC has announced that it’s much anticipated national broadband plan will now be released on March 16 — a day earlier than originally scheduled.

The Tax Man

By Bruce

With broadband stimulus funds slowly making their way to applicants, a new wrinkle has emerged that may slow down recipients putting the money to good use. As Phone Plus reports, it comes down to the question of taxes:

[I]f the government doesn’t clarify whether the grants are considered taxable income, onlookers fear recipients won’t use the money any time soon – defeating the purpose of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

When asked whether recipients would be taxed on the stimulus funds, the Treasury Department reportedly offered no concrete answer. Stay tuned…

A Question of Authority

By Bruce

One of the questions surrounding the current net neutrality debate is whether the Federal Communications Commission has the authority needed to impose new regulations on the Internet. As Computer World reports, former solicitor general Gregory Garre believes the FCC must ask Congress for authority before it acts:

If the FCC wants to create new Internet regulations, it should have the backing of Congress, Garre added. “It would be appropriate for the FCC to go to Congress,” he said. “This isn’t some minor regulatory issue we’re talking about. The FCC itself has described the Internet as something that ‘has transformed our nation’s economy, culture and democracy.’”

Countdown to a National Broadband Plan

By Bruce

In just 14 days, the FCC will present a national broadband plan to Congress. Today, the Wall Street Journal highlights some of what the plan will entail:

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski’s coming National Broadband Plan will propose up to $25 billion in new federal spending for high-speed Internet lines and a wireless network for police and firefighters as part of a broader plan that appears to be a win for wireless companies.

The plan will also offer a variety of ideas for expanding Americans’ access to affordable Internet over the next decade. Mr. Genachowski has been slowly releasing details about the plan, which will be released in mid-March, and last week suggested that Congress spend $12 billion to $16 billion for the wireless Internet network for police and firefighters.

Innovation in the Ecosystem

By Bruce

The American Consumer Institute has released a new study, “Innovation and National Broadband Policies: Facts, Fiction and Unanswered Questions.” From the Executive Summary:

“Innovation” has emerged as a pivotal element in the debate over whether the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should impose new constraints on managers and providers of broadband network infrastructures. This study brings to bear facts and analysis emerging from a review of much of the literature on innovation and especially that bearing on claims by advocates of “net neutrality,” “open networks” and related notions.

We find that innovation is thriving at both the core and the edge of the network in the current policy environment, which has fundamentally allowed the Internet to evolve with little government involvement. Further, we find no evidence that greater FCC involvement in markets for broadband services would protect or promote innovation in the Internet Ecosystem. Indeed, we believe that such intervention is more likely to discourage innovation than stimulate it.

The full ACI study is available on their website (PDF).

The Chilling Effect of Net Neutrality

By Bruce

At the Huffington Post, Digital Society Fellow (and IIA Broadband Ambassador) Bret Swanson writes about the negative effect proposed net neutrality regulations would have on jobs and the economy:

Supporters might argue Net Neutrality will protect consumer access to the Internet and promote long-term innovation. These are crucially important goals. But I think they are wrong on these policy virtues as well. I’ve made the case elsewhere that Net Neutrality could have prohibited important business and technical innovations, from the exclusive handset arrangement that spawned the iPhone to the content delivery networks (CDNs) that enabled YouTube.

Regardless of one?s view of long-term effects, however, there is little chance Net Neutrality regulations could improve the near-term jobs picture. There is, on the other hand, a substantial possibility for harm. Net Neutrality could substantially reduce the willingness of service providers to invest in new wired and wireless networks. And it could do so immediately. Any capital expenditure reductions would directly affect tens of thousands of workers who build and maintain these networks. Capex reductions would also ripple through the whole network equipment and software value chain, starting with large companies like Cisco, Juniper, Corning, and Qualcomm; then damaging the prospects of hundreds of smaller suppliers in the high-end semiconductor and software sectors.

For more, check out Swanson’s report for Entropy Economics on net neutrality and jobs.

A Matter of Spectrum

By Bruce

Yesterday, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski revealed that as part of its impending national broadband plan, television broadcasters would be asked to volunteer some of their spectrum. From Ars Technica:

The FCC’s boss has to maneuver somewhat gingerly around this issue. The broadcasting industry has given a distinctly cold reception to wireless and consumer device maker proposals for ways that television license holders could dramatically reconfigure their high altitude, high power transmission systems to free up as much as 180 MHz of spectrum. Now the FCC and NTIA are talking about 500 MHz.

So Genachowski emphasized that this would be a “voluntary program.”

With the unprecedented adoption of mobile Internet in recent years, America is facing what Genachowski himself has called a “looming spectrum crisis.” Wireless carriers agree. Which means if broadcasters refuse to volunteer spectrum for wireless use, the fight could quickly turn heated. Stay tuned…

Against Title II

By Bruce

As proposed new regulations on the Internet continue to be debated, some of America’s major Internet providers — including Verizon, AT&T, and Time Warner, among others — have sent a letter to the FCC arguing that the broadband industry should not be classified as a Title II telecommunications service. From the letter:

Some net neutrality proponents believe that economic growth is propelled primarily by investment at the “edge” if the Internet, and not by network providers who operate the Internet’s core and access networks, but that is a dangerously flawed vision. Continued investment and innovation by each group mutually expands opportunities for the other. The greater ability of network operators to offer innovative, revenue-generating enhanced capabilities and features to application and content providers, the greater the ability of the network operators to expand the potential reach and robustness of those networks for consumers. And the better the network capabilities available to “edge” providers, the greater the opportunity for them to develop innovative services that increase consumer demand for broadband. The current, stable Title I regulatory environment has facilitated this “virtuous cycle” of investment and innovation all levels of the Internet, just as the Commission expected.

This is certainly no time to retreat from those policies. Many of our nation’s core priorities in education, health care, energy conservation, environmental protection, technological innovation, job-producing investment, and economic growth depend on the continued flow of private capital for deploying and expanding broadband networks.

Read the industry’s full letter to the FCC.

Surveying Broadband

By Bruce

In advance of its deadline to present a national broadband plan to Congress on March 17, the FCC conducted a consumer survey on Internet usage. The commission will be presenting the results at the Brookings Institute today, but via Multichannel News here are some highlights:

The survey, a random phone survey conducted in October and November, found that 80 million adults (and 13 million kids) do not have high-speed Internet at home.

More than one-third of the non-adopters (28 million adults) indicated that they don’t have broadband because either the price of service is too high (15%); they can’t afford a computer; installation costs are too high (10%); or they don’t want a long-term service contract (9%). According to the survey, the average monthly broadband bill is $41.

The full FCC survey results are available via the Wall Street Journal.

Grading the Grants

By Bruce

Geoff Daily of App Rising, who has been keeping a watchful eye on how and when federal broadband grants are doled out, has handed out grades for the first year of the effort. The overall grade: D+.

Despite the bad grade, however, Daily is still hopeful:

Just because the stimulus is failing now on almost all fronts doesn’t mean that it can’t recover and post solid even spectacular marks. Ultimately the grade that matters most is that the best projects are funded and on that they’re not failing. They’re also learning from at least some of their mistakes. So I for one am still hopeful that the broadband stimulus will be more than just another government folly.

Net Neutrality vs. the Goal of Universal Broadband

By Bruce

From a Huffington Post op-ed by Julius H. Hollis of the Alliance for Digital Equality on the national broadband plan:

More than $100 billion has already been spent to deploy high-speed systems across America. But the FCC has estimated that $350 billion is necessary to achieve universal broadband access. As such, the focus of the FCC should be on speeding this process, either through federal programs or by incentivizing the investment of private companies.

Throughout this process, we must also strive to ensure that access remains affordable. To achieve this, I see one logical solution - to have the build-out in these communities financed in part by agreements between the companies paying to lay the wires and the companies that will use those links to sell services.

Largely missing the point, proposals for new “neutrality” rules do nothing to help us realize these important goals. Instead, it is widely thought that new net neutrality regulations will reduce much needed investment in infrastructure, thus causing broadband to become less affordable and accessible to underserved and un-served populations.

Teasing from the FCC

By Bruce

Over at the FCC’s official broadband blog, Chairman Julius Genachowski has posted some tidbits from the commission’s upcoming national broadband plan. Writes Genachowski:

By setting ambitious goals and laying out proposals to connect all Americans to a world-class broadband infrastructure, we will help secure our country’s global competitiveness for generations to come.

The FCC’s National Broadband Plan will include the following key recommendations:

100 Squared Initiative: 100 million households at a minimum of 100 megabits per second (Mbs)—the world’s largest market of high-speed broadband users—to ensure that new businesses are created in America and stay in America.

Broadband Testbeds: Encourage the creation of ultra high-speed broadband testbeds as fast, or faster, than any Internet service in the world, so that America is hosting the experiments that produce tomorrow’s ideas and industries.

Digital Opportunities: Expand digital opportunities by moving our adoption rates from roughly 65 percent to more than 90 percent and making sure that every child in America is digitally literate by the time he or she leaves high school.

The full plan is scheduled to be presented to Congress on March 17.

The State of the Digital Divide

By Bruce

Multichannel News digs into a new report from the FCC on the state of high speed Internet in America and finds there’s clear evidence that despite gains, the digital divide is alive and well — especially in low-density areas:

For the fixed connections, like cable and DSL, the commission data found that in 200 counties (representing 1% of U.S. households), no more than 20% met that definition of high speed, while in about half as many counties (104) with eight times the population (8% of the households), 80% had at least those speeds.

Broadband Expansion and Job Growth

By Bruce

The Democratic Leadership Council has released a new report on job growth in America. Entitled “Where Jobs Come From: The Role of Innovation, Investment, and Infrastructure in Economic and Job Growth,” it helps shed light on the important role broadband expansion plays in creating new jobs. From page 11 of the report:

Job creation was also strongest in the industries that utilized information technology and had the most to gain from faster Internet connectivity. Industries such as Information; Finance and Insurance; Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services; and Utilities saw employment growth ranging from 12 to 16 percent. Given this evidence, there is enormous potential for job creation if we expand broadband deployment and upgrade existing infrastructure. A Brookings study found that for every 3 million new lines deployed, nearly 300,000 economy-wide jobs are created. Separate research has shown small businesses, the drivers of job creation and biggest beneficiaries of faster networks, hire 40 percent of the high tech workforce of scientists, engineers, and computer programmers.

Read the full DLC report (PDF).

Bringing Broadband to Low-Income Students

By Bruce

Post Tech reports that Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) has introduced a bill that will expand a program to bring e-book readers and broadband access to low-income students.

The bill is an expansion of the original program passed in 1996 along with the Telecom Act, which increased school connectivity from 12% to 95%.

Net Neutrality & Investment

By Bruce

Last week, Entropy Economics released a detailed report on the effects net neutrality would have on jobs. After examining the official comments submitted to the FCC, Entropy found that those who could be counted as “Net Neutrality Skeptics” directly employ 1,440,021 people. “Net Neutrality Supporters,” meanwhile, only employ 148,936 — a difference of 10 to 1.

The Entropy report also looked at the amount of Capital Expenditures for skeptics and supporters, and the result was even more startling. From an article at Digital Society by the report’s author, Bret Swanson (who is also an IIA Broadband Ambassador):

We have often noted the communications sector’s important capital investment role in the U.S. economy. In 2008, U.S. info-tech capital investment totaled $455 billion, or 43% of all U.S. non-structure investment. The communications service providers alone invest $65 billion or more annually. Among companies filing FCC comments, the Net Neutrality Skeptics invested $189 billion over the last three years, compared to $18 billion for the Net Neutrality Supporters. Two of the nation’s largest infrastructure investors, AT&T and Verizon, each have more employees than all the Net Neutrality Supporting companies combined.

Net neutrality supporters often dismiss the effect new regulations will have on private investment. But as the Entropy report makes clear, discouraging private investment from net neutrality skeptics would have a chilling effect on the U.S. economy. And with the FCC’s own estimates for the cost of a national broadband plan reaching as high as $350 billion, a reduction in private investment could put the goal of bringing broadband to everyone out of reach.

Net Neutrality & Jobs

By Bruce

Entropy Economics has published a new report examining the effect proposed net neutrality regulations would have on the U.S. job market. From the report (PDF):

Regardless of one’s view of long-term effects… there is little chance Net Neutrality regulations could improve the near-term jobs picture.

There is, on the other hand, a substantial possibility for harm. Net Neutrality could substantially reduce the willingness of service providers to invest in new wired and wireless networks. And it could do so immediately. Any capital expenditure reductions would directly affect tens of thousands of workers who build and maintain these networks. Capex reductions would also ripple through the whole network equipment and software value chain, starting with large companies like Cisco, Juniper, Alcatel-Lucent, and Qualcomm; then damaging the prospects of hundreds of smaller suppliers in the high-end semiconductor and software sectors.

Entropy also looked at the number of employees of both net neutrality skeptics and supporters, and finds that skeptics directly employ 1,440,021 people, while supporters employ just a fraction of that — 148,836.

Read the full report.

More Minority Groups Warning Against Net Neutrality

By Bruce

Via Broadband Breakfast, three minority business groups — the National Black Chamber of Commerce, the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, and the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce — held a conference call yesterday to express their concerns over the effect of proposed net neutrality regulations:

The business officials expressed concern over internet regulation, emphasizing their priority to bring broadband access to minority populations.

They said that broadband plays a role in job creation and as a vehicle for innovation, growth, and competition. This, they said, was a reason to avoid net neutrality regulations, as they could slow down the deployment of broadband networks in underserved areas.

With estimates for the final tab of a national broadband plan reaching as high as $350 billion, private investment will be critical for wiring America. Any new regulations that stall investment could put nationwide broadband out of reach.

Re-Committing to Net Neutrality

By Bruce

During a special YouTube event yesterday, President Obama re-declared his commitment to proposed net neutrality regulations. Via Multichannel News:

“I’m a big believer in net neutrality,” he said. “I campaigned on this. I continue to be a strong supporter of it. My FCC chairman Julius Genachowski has indicated that he shares the view that we’ve got to keep the Internet open, that we don’t want to create a bunch of gateways that prevent somebody who doesn’t have a lot of money but has a good idea from being able to start their next YouTube or their next Google on the Internet.”

The president went on to say that the administration was getting “pushback, obviously, from some of the bigger carries who would like to be able to charge more fees and extract more money from wealthier customers.” Not addressed, however, were the concerns from many of the people against new regulations that imposing net neutrality could hurt private investment in the Internet and further exacerbate the digital divide.

A Court Challenge

By Bruce

With the FCC moving forward with its proposed net neutrality regulations, at least one member of the commission is already warning that any new regulations will surely face a legal challenge once enacted. Reports PC World:

If the U.S. Federal Communications Commission adopts broad new net neutrality regulations, the agency’s authority to do so will be challenged in court, predicted Robert McDowell, a member of the commission.

It’s unclear whether the FCC has the authority to create net neutrality rules for broadband providers, which under current FCC rules are classified as largely unregulated information services, McDowell said Friday during a speech at a Free State Foundation broadband policy forum. And the suggestion by some advocacy groups that the FCC reclassify broadband services as more heavily regulated common carrier services would also face lawsuits, he said.

Jobs and the Case Against More Regulation

By Bruce

A new study from Larry F. Darby, Joseph P. Fuhr, and Stephen B. Pociask of the American Consumer Institute helps shed light on the effect the FCC’s proposed net neutrality regulations could have on investment and job creation. The study, titled “The Internet Ecosystem: Employment Impacts of National Broadband Policy,” calls for “regulatory forbearance toward broadband networks” in order to stimulate investment and the creation of new jobs. From the executive summary:

• By eliminating business options successfully practiced by proponents of more regulation, the Commission’s proposal would dramatically increase market risk, lower expected growth, suppress network investment, and dampen opportunities for network providers to maintain and create jobs.

• The proposed change from Ex Post to Ex Ante regulation would create lengthy regulatory delays and increase regulatory risk for investors, while dampening prospects for new job creation in the Internet sector and in others it supports.

• These and other threats to investment incentives and job creation opportunities are out of line with both the emerging national broadband policy and the growing imperative to create more good, permanent jobs.

The study also warns that the proposed regulations would “shift risk, returns, growth and opportunity away from ‘core’ network providers and in favor of ‘edge’ applications and content providers.” Given that core companies (such as providers) historically invest more and create more jobs compared to “edge” companies (such as content providers), new regulation would have a chilling effect on both a national broadband plan and the creation of much-needed jobs.

The full study is available in a PDF on the American Consumer Institute website. It ends with an important message recently delivered from the Communications Workers of America to the FCC:

Put network investment and associated job creation at the center of the discussion, acknowledging that the telecommunications sector is essential to recovery in the current downturn and to our nation’s long-term economic competitiveness.

Grants From RUS

By Bruce

The Rural Utilities Service has announced the latest round of broadband stimulus funds, with 11 states receiving grants this time around: Alaska, Alabama, California, Iowa, Kansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, Missouri, North Dakota, Oregon, and Virginia.

All told, 14 projects are receiving funding, totaling $310 million.

(Via Broadband Breakfast.)

Another Round of Grants

By Bruce

Yesterday, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration announced the latest batch of broadband grants. In all, $63 million in grants were awarded to three states: Massachusetts, Michigan, and North Carolina.

So far NTIA has awarded $253 million in grants, roughly 3.5 percent of the eventual total.

Broadband Access & Jobs

By Bruce

A new study from the Phoenix Center finds that broadband users are 50% less likely to give up searching for a job. The Hill examines why this is important:

Discouragement has been cited by the Bureau of Labor Statistics as a reason for an expected increase in the jobless rate this year. As of December, a large number of workers have quit looking for work because they think no jobs are available.

“Our study also shows the enormous potential benefit of community broadband centers for those who are not connected at home,” said Lawrence Spiwak, president of the Phoenix Center. “While broadband use at home delivers significant benefits, shared facilities can be a valuable solution to connectivity gaps in unserved and underserved communities.”

The Price of Net Neutrality

By Bruce

At the Huffington Post, Navarrow Wright, President of Maximum Leverage Solutions, has a must-read post breaking down the negative effects net neutrality could very well have on minorities and the urban poor:

The FCC is playing a dangerous game here, and the people who have the most to lose are already the socially and economically disenfranchised members of our national community - low-income, rural, urban, non-English speaking, tribal, minority, underserved and underserved populations. Neither the Commission nor the American people can rightly afford to preoccupy themselves with corporate interests over the greater priority interests of people. As responsible citizens, we have an obligation to speak out for and protect the interests of those who are not already digitally connected. I applaud the minority elected officials, the civil rights leaders and the consumer groups who are making their voices heard. I encourage the FCC to listen to the people.

Net Neutrality: Pro and Con

By Bruce

Sphere has an interesting debate today on the FCC’s proposed net neutrality rules. In the pro camp, Timothy Karr writes:

Because of net neutrality, consumers have had unfettered access to new content and ideas online; our preferences and choices have determined which new ideas succeed and which don’t. Net neutrality simply means “no discrimination,” and this user-powered architecture is the reason the Internet has become such a powerful engine for consumer choice and democratic empowerment.

These protections have worked brilliantly. For two decades, the Internet thrived. It became a competitive market in the truest sense. Under net neutrality, doctoral students working out of their dorm room created Google; college students started Facebook; a Pez hobbyist invented eBay; an Israeli teenager wrote the code for instant messaging.

These innovators started small and used the Internet’s level playing field to become major forces in the new media marketplace. Their ideas have disrupted the status quo of information gatekeepers to usher in an era where content and consumers are king.

Taking the opposing view is Stephen Pociask:

The fact is that different services have different requirements in order to work properly. Activities like online videos or remote medical monitoring are easily disrupted by tiny delays—often measured in milliseconds—that keep them from working properly. Others, like e-mail, tolerate delays with little problem.

To ensure the best performance possible, network operators need the flexibility to work with the providers of content, software developers, creators of online games, and other Internet-related businesses and services. But proposed Internet regulations under consideration at the FCC would greatly limit such collaboration.

Supporters of Internet regulations, typically advocated to ensure “network neutrality,” say regulations are needed to make sure that consumers can go to whatever Web site they want. But when was the last time that your Internet provider blocked you from any activity you wanted to perform online? Chances are you’ve never had that problem. And if it occurred, the FCC already has the authority to step in quickly and clear things up.

Both editorials are worth reading in their entirety. You can also read IIA’s thoughts on the issue (PDF).

Responding to the FCC

By Bruce

We’ve filed a response to the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) regarding net neutrality. You can read it here (PDF).

Our Comment to the FCC

By Bruce

As part of the discussion surrounding proposed net neutrality regulations, IIA has submitted a comment to the FCC. Click here to read our thoughts. You can also upvote our comment and increase its visibility.

2010 Slowdown

By Bruce

A new report from market research firm Pike & Fischer (via Broadcasting & Cable) estimates that new high-speed Internet subscriptions may drop by as much as 10% this year. The firm also predicts that home penetration will reach 65%, leaving 35% unconnected.

A Delay for the Plan

By Bruce

The FCC, due to present a national broadband plan to Congress by February 17, has asked for a one month extension so that it can “finish digging through the massive volume of public comments.”

Connecting Small Businesses

By Bruce

Broadband Breakfast reports on a recent FCC field hearing at the University of Chicago. The topic: How broadband can affect small businesses:

“When discussing the digital divide, small businesses are often overlooked,” said Norma Reyes, commissioner of the department of business affairs and consumer protection for the city of Chicago.

“Small businesses are really the engine of job creation in the U.S., and they have been for a long time,” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski explained at the hearing.

“The statistics are really amazing. Small businesses inject about a trillion into the American economy. Small businesses have created on a net basis, over 93% of new jobs over the past 15 years.”

A Questionable Report

By Bruce

Writing for RealClearMarkets, Bret Swanson, president of Entropy Economics (and an IIA Broadband Ambassador) investigates the much-touted study on open networks produced by Harvard’s Berkman Center for the Internet and Society and finds problems:

The 231-page report was an ode to foreign broadband success and especially to the regulatory model of “open access,” a euphemism for mandated sharing of network assets at government-set prices. Although U.S. Internet innovation is flourishing, the Berkman Center found the U.S. tragically lagging other nations in consumer broadband penetration, prices, and network speeds. In a perfect set-up for a dramatic re-regulation of U.S. communications networks, Berkman concluded that open access mandates have “a positive and significant effect” on broadband penetration and that the effect is “somewhat larger . . . and more robust than previously thought.”

Just one problem. Actually many problems. The report botched its chief statistical model in half a dozen ways. It used loads of questionable data. It didn’t account for the unique market structure of U.S. broadband. It reversed the arrow of time in its country case studies. It ignored the high-profile history of open access regulation in the U.S. It didn’t conduct the literature review the FCC asked for. It excommunicated Switzerland.

Read Swanson’s full report. The Berkman study is available here in PDF form.

Defining Speed

By Bruce

With 58 days to go before the FCC presents its national broadband plan, Rep. Rick Boucher [D-Va] has megabit speed on the mind. Reports Media Post:

As the Federal Communications Commission readies its national broadband plan, a leading lawmaker is urging the agency to aim to ensure that the vast majority of U.S. residents have speedy connections.

“The commission should explicitly endorse a goal for minimum broadband speeds of at least 50 megabits downstream and 20 megabits upstream for 80 percent of the population by 2015,” Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) wrote last week in a letter to the FCC. “Without committing to such ambitious, but achievable, levels of speed and service, the promises of telemedicine, distance learning and telecommuting may remain a far-off dream rather than a near-term reality.”

Rep. Boucher’s full letter to the FCC is available here.

Grants Beginning to Arrive

By Bruce

Vice President Biden is in Georgia today, where he’s expected to announce that $182 million in broadband grants from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will be awarded to 18 projects.

While this is a great step toward the goal of nationwide broadband access, much more needs to be done — and soon. As GigaOm points out, this latest batch of grants will mean only 3% of the broadband stimulus has been allocated, with less than a year to go until the process is scheduled to be completed.

More Symposium Coverage

By Bruce

Both Broadband Breakfast and Richard Prince of the Black College Wire have rundowns of last week’s Broadband Symposium on access for all Americans.

Erasing the Digital Divide

By Bruce

As the deadline for the release of a national broadband plan quickly approaches, a coalition representing minority communities has released a report outlining steps that can be taken to erase the digital divide.

The report, “Toward Access, Adoption and Inclusion: A Call For Digital Equality and Broadband Opportunity,” was issued by the National Black Caucus of State Legislators, the National Hispanic Caucus of State Legislators, the National Caucus of Native American State Legislators, and the National Pacific American Caucus of State Legislators. From Business Wire:

“Even where service is available, if the proposition of adopting broadband is too expensive, people will not use it,” the report said. It urged policymakers to address affordability through a combination of government initiatives, programmatic reforms, incentives for private sector action, and public-private partnerships.

It warned against policies that might shift costs to the poor or “over-burden low-volume broadband users with the costs of maintaining services for high-volume users.”

“Before any new policy regime is implemented, we must fully understand the potential socio-economic implications of its implementation,” the report added. The lawmakers also called for “a system of checks and balances that encourages, rather than dissuades, private investment in broadband deployment and innovation.”

Broadband Grants on the Way

By Bruce

So far, the national broadband plan has faced its share of hurdles. But as Broadband Breakfast reports, the Obama administration is promising the money will start flowing soon:

Despite government delays in announcing the grant awards for the $7.2 billion in broadband stimulus money Congress allocated in January, Vice President Joe Biden Thursday said that within the next month billions will be given to broadband and high-speed rail investments.

“And by design, the items in the act which have the biggest impact are yet to come. Within the next two weeks to a month, another roughly $13 billion is going to be announced rolling out in terms of both investments in broadband and high-speed rail, and competitive education and infrastructure,” said Biden in remarks he gave at the opening session of the White House Jobs and Economic Growth Forum.

USF and Spectrum

By Bruce

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is looking to change the Universal Service Fund. Reports cnet:

The Universal Service Fund is a $7 billion federal subsidy program that is funded by fees added to consumer phone bills. The USF was originally designed to provide subsidies to pay for phone service in rural communities and to low-income residents. But the FCC believes that the fund should also be used to help pay for universal broadband, a policy priority for President Obama’s administration.”

In other FCC news, the agency is now officially seeking comment on whether spectrum currently used by broadcasters should instead be used for wireless.

Net Neutrality Takes Another Step Forward

By Bruce

Yesterday, the FCC released its official Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for “preserving an open Internet”—also known as net neutrality.

From the summary:

In this NPRM, the Commission proposes draft language to codify the four principles the Commission articulated in the Internet Policy Statement; a fifth principle that would require a broadband Internet access service provider to treat lawful content, applications, and services in a nondiscriminatory manner; and a sixth principle that would require a broadband Internet access service provider to disclose such information concerning network management and other practices as is reasonably required for users and content, application, and service providers to enjoy the protections specified in this rulemaking.

The first round of public comments is open until January 14. The full NPRM is available in a PDF.

More Mapping Grants

By Bruce

Yesterday, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration announced a handful of new recipients for state broadband mapping grants. The states chosen were Alaska, Colorado, Delaware, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri.

The State of Deployment

By Bruce

In an effort to better understand broadband access in America, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration has asked the FCC for access to the “Form 477 database,” which was assembled from information offered high-speed Internet providers on broadband deployment.

The FCC has stated that barring any objections, it will comply with the request by December 7.

Ongoing Delays

By Bruce

The flood of applications for federal broadband grants continues to be a problem for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which has announced that the next round of grants now won’t be issued until December, and the actual funding of grants won’t start until next February.

Online Primetime

By Bruce

So-called “bandwidth hogs”—people who use an inordinate amount of bandwidth each month—have a history of giving Internet service providers headaches. But as Todd Spangler of Multichannel News points out, thanks to the popularity of online video, it’s not just the hogs who are creating a bandwidth crunch:

[A]ccording to recent analysis of Internet usage patterns, there’s a “primetime” for broadband consumption, which a huge monthly cap won’t do anything to address. A monthly 250 GB cap only filters out the bit junkies who are literally sharing terabytes of stuff; granted, they unequivocally use more than their fair share but capping them doesn’t solve long-term congestion issues.

Network-management equipment vendor Sandvine says that between 7 and 10 p.m. in any given region around the world, the usage profile among all users was roughly equivalent, mainly thanks to the explosive popularity of Internet TV and online video. That means in that primetime window, you and I use the same amount of bandwidth as the overall heaviest users (”bandwidth hogs”) who use their connections 24 hours per day.

The FCC is Busy

By Bruce

As the FCC works toward a national broadband plan, it is also seeking to have an integral role in finding solutions for broadband deployment, lack of spectrum, and digital literacy. Reports the Wall Street Journal:

The FCC identified a number of issues the government should address, including the high cost of laying new broadband lines in rural areas, a lack of airwaves for wireless Web access and ill-informed consumers.

“This focus on broadband is a reflection of a recognition that the U.S. is lagging behind,” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said Wednesday at the agency’s monthly meeting.

Earlier this, the agency also passed a new rule that will help wireless companies speed up the process of installing new cell towers.

Some Opposition Within the FCC

By Bruce

Though the FCC is moving forward with proposed net neutrality rules, there remains dissent over the policy within its own ranks. Reports Broadcasting & Cable:

FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell made it clear Thursday that he remains opposed to the substantive underpinnings of the FCC Democratic majority’s proposal to expand and codify network neutrality principles.

Speaking at an Institute For Policy Communications Summit in Washington, McDowell pointed out that while he had voted to initiate the rulemaking, he has never voted against doing so in his tenure, saying it was important to be part of the process. But he also emphasized that he had dissented from the proposals themselves, and said he hoped all the commissioners minds “can be changed purely on the basis of the facts and the law.”

Defining Reasonable

By Bruce

PC World reports on forum recently held by the Institute for Policy Innovation, specifically discussing the FCC’s proposed net neutrality rules. At issue was whether the rules—especially when it comes to what counts as “reasonable network management by ISPs—could mean for the Internet:

The proposed rules would prohibit broadband providers from selectively blocking or slowing legal Web content and services, while allowing them to engage in “reasonable” network management. Some speakers at the event worried about how the FCC will define reasonable network management, with no definition in a notice of proposed rulemaking released by the FCC in October.

The FCC’s definition of reasonable network management is likely to be challenged in court, and that uncertainty could slow down network investment, said Robert McDowell, a Republican member of the FCC. “‘Reasonable’ will be litigated,” he said. “At the end of the day, do we want lawyers running the Internet?”

The FCC is currently seeking comment on the proposed plan.

Speeding Up

By Bruce

Up until now, the broadband grant process has been slower than anticipated. But with the unemployment rate now over 10%, the Wall Street Journal reports that the Obama administration wants to speed the process up:

Officials at the Commerce and Agriculture Departments outlined plans to consolidate into a single round a grant process originally projected to go for two more rounds. The first round of grants is scheduled to be made in December. The departments asked for comments on how the program could be changed to make it easier for companies to apply.

“This will get the funds out the door faster to stimulate the economy and create jobs,” said Jonathan Adelstein, the Agriculture Department official overseeing the program in a statement. The Agriculture Department oversees a program to build broadband lines in rural areas and will distribute loans as part of the stimulus program.

In other national broadband plan news, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has announced the next round of broadband mapping grants. This time, seven states were on the list: Alabama, Washington, Wyoming, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin.

Paying for Demand

By Bruce

A new study from think tank Information Technology & Innovation Foundation suggests that one way to increase demand for broadband in poor and rural areas is for the government to pay providers to sign up new customers. From PC World:

The ITIF recommends that the U.S. government run a competition for broadband providers to sign up subscribers in low-income areas. The winner of the competition in each low-income community would get $250 per subscriber, and this one-time contest could raise broadband subscriber numbers by 5 percent and cost $970 million.

The full ITIF study is available as a PDF.

Protecting Copyright

By Bruce

Part of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s net neutrality proposal is the flexibility for Internet Service Providers to use “reasonable network management.” Just what counts as reasonable has yet to be decided, but the Motion Picture Association of America — which has long complained about the pirating of content over the Internet—believes policing for copyright infringement should absolutely fall under the definition. From PC Mag:

[F]reedom of flexibility, two MPAA executives wrote on Friday, should be interpreted to allow U.S. ISPs to take measures to prevent copyrighted data from being pirated and sent around the Internet. The letter was co-authored by Michael O’Leary, the MPAA’s executive vice president of government relations and chief counsel, and Frank Cavaliere, vice president and senior counsel for government relations and policy for the MPAA.

Not only would the anti-piracy measures help promote the U.S. film economy, the two wrote, but eliminating the spread of copyrighted video files would also reduce the amount of traffic being passed over the nation’s networks, reducing the overall load. Both O’Leary and Cavaliere also tried to make clear that they were not pushing for specific solutions, but the latitude to allow the industry to develop and deploy its own measures.

Both Sides of Net Neutrality

By Bruce

Today’s Wall Street Journal has dueling editorials on the issue of net neutrality. In the pro corner are Mitchell Baker and John Lilly of Mozilla:

The fundamental technologies of the Internet have always been open; the FCC’s proposed rules would merely preserve that openness. The principle that any “bit” of information is treated the same as any other bit is a defining characteristic of the Internet; it is a central aspect of the design that has lead to the unprecedented impact of the Internet on our lives.

In the con corner are senators Orrin Hatch and Jim DeMint:

Net neutrality may sound like fairness but it is actually the opposite. Bandwidth is finite—like the finite number of lanes on a highway—and network providers must innovate in order to accommodate the burgeoning traffic. As they invest billions of private dollars in new and improved networks, they should rightly expect to set prices and manage those networks as they see fit.

A Delay in Broadband Grants

By Bruce

Via Broadcasting & Cable, the National Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA) and Rural Utilities Services (RUS) — the two agencies in charge of distributing grants for broadband expansion — have decided to delay announcing the winning bidders by at least a month.

Welcome David

By Bruce

Earlier today, we announced David Sutphen will be joining me as co-chairman of IIA. David brings a ton of experience and insight to the national broadband debate, and I look forward to working with him on a daily basis.

David has already blogged about his joining IIA (see below), and you can read more coverage from the Washington Post and The Hill.

Net Neutrality Moving Forward

By Bruce

Today the FCC formally approved a draft of net neutrality rules. Three of the five commissioners approved of the rules, with two (both Republicans) concurring and dissenting in part.

Here’s a summary of the proposed rules from the agency’s website:

“Under the draft rules, subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service may not:

1) prevent any of its users from sending or receiving the lawful content of the user’s choice over the Internet;

2) prevent any of its users from running the lawful applications or using the lawful services of the user’s choice;

3) prevent any of its users from connecting to and using on its network the user’s choice of lawful devices that do not harm the network;

4) deprive any of its users of the user’s entitlement to competition among network providers, application providers, service providers, and content providers.

5) A provider of broadband Internet access service must treat lawful content, applications, and services in a nondiscriminatory manner.

6) A provider of broadband Internet access service must disclose such information concerning network management and other practices as is reasonably required for users and content, application, and service providers to enjoy the protections specified in this rulemaking.”

Network management is “reasonable,” the FCC says, if it is used to:

• manage congestion on networks.

• address harmful traffic.

• block unlawful content.

• block unlawful transfers of content, such as copyright infringement.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski closed the meeting by declaring the upcoming process would be flexible and have a light touch:

[T]he government’s role in preserving openness is important but also modest. It should be no greater than necessary to achieve the core goal of preserving a free and open Internet. Open Internet rules should be high-level, not heavy-handed. And in fact, the draft rules in the Notice are less than two pages long. The goal is to provide a fair framework in which all participants in the Internet ecosystem can operate, ultimately minimizing the need for government involvement.

While today’s meeting formally moves net neutrality forward, the process—an inevitable challenges in court—are only beginning.

Investment is Key

By Bruce

Updated research from both the Information Technology and Innovation Alliance and former FCC Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth helps shed new light on just how important investment in the broadband industry is for America’s economy.

Despite differences in methodology, both ITIF and Furchtgott-Roth find that a reduction in investment of just 2 percent by the broadband service industry would mean the loss over over 24,000 jobs. Make that reduction 5 percent, and the loss in jobs leaps to between 47,000 and 78,000 jobs. And a 10 percent drop would mean over 100,000 jobs.

Each year the broadband services sector invest roughly $60-$80 billion — or 80 percent of the Information, Communications and Technology sector investment. With unemployment in America hovering around 10 percent, job losses would be disastrous for our economy. Which is why broadband policies need to ensure that investment in America’s broadband infrastructure is strongly encouraged to continue.

Letters to the Commissioner

By Bruce

With the FCC set to officially move forward with net neutrality regulations this Thursday, letters from both sides of the debate are flying into Commission Julius Genachowski’s inbox. Last week, eighteen Republican senators and 44 major companies filed letters warning against regulations. And now, Multichannel News reports, 72 Democrats in the House are urging the FCC to move slowly:

According to a copy of the letter, the Democrats urged the commission to “carefully consider the full range of potential consequences of government action,” and caution against a too heavy regulatory regime. ”[I]t is our strong belief that continued progress in expanding the reach and capabilities of broadband networks will require the commission to reiterate, not repudiate, its historic commitment to competition, private investment, and a restrained regulatory approach.”

Putting the term network neutrality in quotes in their letter, the Dems wrote: “[W]e remain suspicious of conclusions based on slogans rather than substance and policies that restrict and inhibit the very innovation and growth that we all seek to achieve.”

It’s not all opponents to net neutrality sending letters, however. As the Wall Street Journal reports, a coalition of Internet companies — including Facebook and Twitter—filed letters in support:

“We believe a process that results in common sense baseline rules is critical to ensuring that the Internet remains a key engine of economic growth, innovation and global competitiveness,” a group of 24 CEOs and Internet company founders wrote in a letter to be delivered to the FCC Monday in support of the proposed net-neutrality rules.

“An open Internet fuels a competitive and efficient marketplace, where consumers make the ultimate choices about which products succeed and which fail. This allows businesses of all sizes, from the smallest start-up to larger corporations, to compete, yielding maximum economic growth and opportunity,” they wrote.

Letters to the Commissioner

By Bruce

The net neutrality debate continues to heat up in Washington.

On Tuesday, a group of eighteen Republican senators led by Sen. Sam Brownback sent a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski warning that new regulations would slow investment. A day later, forty-four companies—including such heavy-hitters as Cisco System, Motorola, and Ericsson—sent a similar letter stating net neutrality would do more harm than good. Via PC World:

“Public policy should encourage more investment to expand access to the Internet, whether it is access through a cell phone, a laptop, a PC or any new device that we have yet to imagine,” the letter said. “If the FCC takes a prescriptive approach to new regulations, then it could place itself in the position of being the final arbiter of what products and services will be allowed on the Internet.”

The FCC are set to vote on net neutrality regulations next week.

Net Neutrality and the Digital Divide

By Bruce

One concern over FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s proposed net neutrality regulations is that they could expand, rather than close, what has been called the “digital divide” in America. Yesterday, it was this concern that prompted some minority rights groups — including the Urban League and the League of United Latin American Citizens and La Raza — to send a letter to the FCC asking the commission to move carefully. From Broadcasting & Cable:

“If the history of civil rights in America teaches us anything,” they said, “it is that facially neutral laws and regulations are not always applied neutrally to the constituencies we represent,” they said. “We certainly don’t want that to happen to Internet regulation too, and we’re very concerned that, despite your very best intentions, some aspects of net neutrality might not turn out to be neutral as applied to our constituencies.”

The FCC is expected to vote on new regulations on October 22.

An Anchor of Fiber

By Bruce

At the urging of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, the FCC explored how much it would cost to bring fiber-optic lines to every one of America’s 120,000 schools, hospitals, and libraries. What the agency found is that to wire such “anchor” institutions could cost somewhere between $5-$10 billion.

The Spectrum Problem

By Bruce

“I believe that the biggest threat to the future of mobile in America is the looming spectrum crisis.”

This came from FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in a speech Wednesday before a wireless trade organization. The reason for the “looming spectrum crisis” is the explosion of wireless Internet in recent years, which threatens to quickly eclipse the amount of spectrum available. And since spectrum has been referred to as the “oxygen of the wireless world,” it’s easy to understand why the Chairman is concerned.

The good news: Genachowski went on to say that the government will be tripling the amount of spectrum available. The bad news: allocating spectrum is slow process, and even tripling what’s available may not be enough.

Bring in the Network Engineers

By Bruce

As the FCC pushes forward with net neutrality regulations — setting an October 22 deadline to formally present the new rules — Gary Kim of TMCnet worries that network engineers are being left out of the debate. Writes Kim:

It is a reasonable public policy goal to prevent discriminatory behavior by actors with significant market power. But it is quite another thing to confuse that goal with the equally-important goal of building high-capacity, continually upgraded broadband networks that offer low retail prices.
It appears that for both goals to be accomplished, we will have to have lots more engineers and architects involved in the policy formation process.

A Letter to the President, an Homage to the Boss

By Bruce

One question often asked about net neutrality is whether new regulations are even needed to keep the Internet open and thriving, a question some Republicans in congress now want answered. Reports Reuters:

A group of U.S. House of Representatives Republicans urged the Federal Communications Commission to conduct a market analysis before proposing a new rule to maintain an open Internet.

In a letter Monday to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, 20 Republicans asked the FCC if the agency will be examining networks, services, consumer electronics equipment, applications, as well as cable, wireline, wireless, satellite and broadband to determine if a rule to govern Net neutrality is necessary.

This was echoed by Bret Swanson of the Progress & Freedom Foundation (also an IIA Broadband Ambassador) in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal:

Despite the brutal economic downturn, Internet-sector growth has been solid. From the Amazon Kindle and 85,000 iPhone “apps” to Hulu video and broadband health care, Web innovation flourishes. Mr. Genachowski heartily acknowledges these happy industry facts but then pivots to assert the Web is at a “crossroads” and only the FCC can choose the right path.

The events of the last half-decade prove otherwise. Since 2004, bandwidth per capita in the U.S. grew to three megabits per second from just 262 kilobits per second, and monthly Internet traffic increased to two billion gigabytes from 170 million gigabytes—both tenfold leaps.

No sector has boomed more than wireless. Yet Mr. Genachowski wants to extend his new regulations to the most technically complicated and bandwidth-constrained realm—mobile networks and devices.

Meanwhile, in other net neutrality news, FCC Chairman Genachowski channeled The Boss — Bruce Springsteen, not President Obama — during a music policy event yesterday. The Wall Street Journal provides Genachowski’s Springsteen-inspired riff before a crowd of musicians on the merits of net neutrality:

“Everywhere from the Streets of Philadelphia to My Hometown in New York, every Bobby Jean and every Jersey Girl l should be counting on the Internet remaining free and open, not Counting on a Miracle. They should count on The Rising of millions of voices to beat back any Darkness on the Edge of Town, or broadband Badlands that could threaten limited choice and create potential bottlenecks.

“The people who built the Internet were working on more than a computer network, they were Working on a Dream. It was a network that was Born to Run in a land of open protocols, (the Promised Land). The Internet is more than an information highway, it is a telecom Thunder Road of wonderfully chaotic creativity and it will be a Lonesome Day if that is ever lost. But, hold on, Janey, Don’t You Lose Heart, because the FCC will be taking up open Internet rules in the near future.”

The Complexity of Net Neutrality

By Bruce

In an editorial for Network World, Johna Till Johnson worries that net neutrality regulations could wind up doing much more harm than good. She writes:

Unfortunately, by imposing legislation designed to keep things that way, net neutrality proponents run a real risk of destroying the very Internet they want to protect.

Here’s why: Internet usage continues to grow dramatically—between 50% and 100% year over year. That’s not a problem in the core, which has more capacity than it needs for the foreseeable future. But access circuits (both wired and wireless) are bandwidth-constrained—and excruciatingly expensive to upgrade (ask Verizon how much it has spent on FiOS). Net neutrality prohibits carriers from recouping those costs by charging differentially based on type of content or quality of service.

At the center of Johnson’s concern is the way carriers currently peer for free with one another—an agreement that could go away if regulation gives them no choice but to start charging for bandwidth. And that, ultimately, could end up hurting the very “garage innovation” net neutrality is intended to help. Writes Johnson:

So your hypothetical penniless entrepreneur will need to decide whether to spend those precious funds to reach Verizon’s users, or those from AT&T—because he won’t be able to afford both. Reaching all users, everywhere, will only be financially viable to behemoths such as Amazon or Google, which already pay for connections to all major networks.

Agree or disagree, Johnson’s editorial illustrates just how complex this issue will be for the FCC as it moves forward.

The Cost of Universal Broadband

By Bruce

A new report from the FCC (via Information Week) pegs the cost of truly universal broadband in America as high as $350 billion. While that might inspire some sticker shock, according to the agency the total reflects providing service at 100 Mbps or higher. The lowest figure is estimated at $20 billion.

While both numbers are well above the $7.2 billion earmarked for national broadband in the federal stimulus, the FCC says universal broadband would create major economic benefits that could eventually out-pace the cost of bringing high-speed Internet to all of America.

Advancing “Net Neutrality”

By Bruce

Last week, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski sent the Internet and opinion pages abuzz when he announced his intention to move forward with so-called “net neutrality” rules. Now, the Washington Post reports, he may be getting some help with his effort courtesy of a new bill sponsored by Sen. Dorgan (D-N.D.) and Sen. Snowe (R-Maine). The exact contents of the bill are still hazy, but Sen. Dorgan told the Post that it will “likely be something that is helpful in the process.”

The FCC has scheduled October 22 as the date it will formally propose new net neutrality rules.

The Spectrum Problem

By Bruce

With smart phones exploding in popularity, service providers are finding that success has its challenges. Namely, the amount of spectrum available now and into the future. Reports Ars Technica:

Mobile carriers in the US have been telling the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for months that they’re in a bad way—450MHz of total spectrum just isn’t enough to keep up with consumer demand for wireless services. As the companies explained in various FCC filings over the summer, the current strain on their networks is caused by a veritable data tsunami that has swept the country in the last few years, and they want the government to make more spectrum available to solve the problem.

The FCC is certainly aware of the issue — and are asking for public comment on spectrum as part of their efforts to put together a national broadband plan. But allocating new spectrum is a long and complicated process, and with smart phone adoption showing no sign of slowing down, time is definitely of the essence.

A Date With Net Neutrality

By Bruce

Via Reuters, the FCC has penciled in October 22 as the date for formally proposing new net neutrality rules.

The debate is sure to be contentious, with both sides already taking their cases to the media. Stay tuned…

Seeking New Comments

By Bruce

GigaOm points to a new call for comments from the FCC:

The Federal Communications Commission has opened a separate request for comments on the use and allocation of spectrum to go more in-depth on issues raised as part of its National Broadband Plan. The agency will seek comments through Oct. 23, “on the sufficiency of current spectrum allocations in spectrum bands, including but not limited to the prime spectrum bands below 3.7 GHz.”

With demand for spectrum skyrocketing due to the spread of mobile broadband, the new call for comments make sense. The FCC’s full request is available here (PDF).

Two Sides to “Net Neutrality”

By Bruce

Yesterday, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski announced the commission would be moving forward with controversial “net neutrality” rules. This led to cheers from groups long supporting the rules. Josh Silver, executive director of the group Free Press — which has long fought for new rules governing the Internet — had this to say:

“We applaud Chairman Genachowski, Commissioner Copps and Commissioner Clyburn for taking a strong stand to promote competition and consumer choice. We look forward to working with the FCC to developing permanent rules that keep the Internet open and free for everyone forever.”

But not everyone thinks the FCC’s push is a good thing. Providers such as AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast have expressed concerns that the new rules — especially in regards to wireless — will hamper investment. And this concern is seconded by an editorial in today’s Wall Street Journal, which worries that net neutrality will actually be counterproductive to the Obama administration’s efforts to expand broadband access:

The reality is that the Obama Administration wants the government to replace Internet operators as the Web’s traffic cop. President Obama has been a long-time proponent of “net neutrality,” which would prevent the use of price to address the increasing popularity of video streaming and other bandwidth-intensive activities that cause Web bottlenecks. But Mr. Obama has also complained about the pace of broadband deployment. If the Administration wants telecom firms to keep expanding their high-speed networks, net neutrality rules are the wrong way forward.

The new policy is a big political victory for Google and other Web content providers whose business model depends on free-loading off the huge capital investments in broadband made by others. Telecom has been one of the bright spots during this recession. Phone companies like Verizon and AT&T have spent tens of billions of dollars on broadband pipe in the past two years. To pick one example: AT&T’s capital investments in the U.S. totaled some $18 billion in 2008, the highest of any company. By threatening to limit what telecom companies can charge and to whom, net neutrality rules will discourage such investment.

Pushing Forward with “Net Neutrality”

By Bruce

FCC chairman Julius Genachowski announced today that the commission will be moving to create net neutrality rules governing Internet service. Mr. Genachowski also announced a new FCC website tracking the effort called OpenInternet.gov.

Mid-Project Progress Report

By Bruce

Blogband.gov is reporting that on September 29, the FCC will receive a four-hour progress report on the national broadband plan:

What do all those facts tell us about the status quo? What do the facts say about the distance between where we are and where we want to be? Who’s been in our shoes before and what can we learn from their experiences? What hurdles do we face, and how can we remove or navigate around them? What existing advantages can we benefit from, and how can we maximize them? What can we create or suggest that is new to improve broadband deployment, adoption, and usage, in light of national purposes, as envisioned by the Recovery Act? We’ll take a stab at these and other questions during the meeting.

Workshops on Tour

By Bruce

Broadcasting & Cable is reporting that the first stop on the FCC’s traveling national broadband workshop tour will occur on Monday, September 21 in Austin, Texas. After that, it’s on to Charleston, South Carolina on Tuesday, October 6.

More information about past and future broadband workshops can be found at broadband.gov.

Defining “Remote Communities”

By Bruce

From the start of efforts to put together a national broadband plan, one key element—the definitions of unserved and under-served areas—has raised concerns, specifically that the definitions leave out large sections of the country that are in need of broadband access. Now, Rep. Rick Boucher—who is Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, has expressed worries about the definition of “remote.” Reports Reuters:

Boucher, a Virginia Democrat, was specifically concerned about how a community might be considered “remote.” For example, some grants are not available to remote communities that are within 50 miles of a city of at least 20,000.

“Almost the entire Eastern U.S. is disqualified from 80 to 100 percent grants by this inappropriate standard, which in mountainous terrain is not a reasonable yardstick for determining need,” Boucher said.

More on Tiered Pricing and the Digital Divide

By Bruce

Two weeks ago, economists Robert Shapiro and Kevin Hassett released a startling study on how flat pricing for broadband service has a hand in maintaining the “digital divide” in America. In a follow-up to the report, Network World interviewed Shapiro:

Right now there’s a small percentage of people who currently account for a large percentage of large bandwidth use, such as gamers and consumers of large amounts of video. And for these large consumers, their demand tends to be relatively inelastic. They really want it and it has greater value to them. Now, as a general property, the lower the income someone has, the more sensitive they are to price. So anything that raises the price will reduce demand for broadband access for low-income users more than it will for high-income users.

The full interview is worth checking out.

Digital Health

By Bruce

The New York Times examines efforts — and struggles — in turning health records digital:

Encouraged by the billions of dollars in government funding, technology companies are making a big push to help bring computerized health records into small-office physician practices.

This is crucial if the goal of bringing doctors’ offices into the computer age is to be achieved, with its promise of improving care and curbing costs. Three-fourths of all the nation’s physicians practice medicine in offices with 10 or fewer doctors.

But the challenge ahead is daunting, for reasons that have more to do with economics than technology.

According to the Times, practices that are successful in making the digital transition fall into two groups: large physician groups with the resources the make the shift, and small practices willing to take the challenge on. Up until now, however, very little help has been available for most smaller practices. That’s sure to change now that the Obama administration has pledged $19 billion in incentives to help make the digital shift.

More Workshops on the Way

By Bruce

The FCC has announced the upcoming schedule and topics in its ongoing national broadband plan workshops:

Tuesday, September 17: Health Care (1:30 pm).

Thursday, September 17: The Rise of Content in the Broadband Ecosystem (9:30 am) and Spectrum (1:30 pm).

Friday, October 2: Diversity and Civil Rights Issues in Broadband Policy (9:30 am)

Tuesday, October 20: Broadband Accessibility for People with Disabilities II: Barriers, Opportunities and Policy Recommendations (9:15 am).

As always more information, along with video and transcripts from past workshops, can be found at broadband.gov.

Broadband Mapping Going Strong

By Bruce

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration has some good news to share about its broadband mapping project. From an NTIA press release:

The Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announced today that it has received applications representing all 50 states, 5 territories, and the District of Columbia to participate in NTIA’s State Broadband Data and Development Grant Program, which will assist NTIA in creating a national broadband map. This unprecedented initiative will provide consumers with better information on the broadband Internet services available to them and inform policymakers’ efforts to increase broadband availability nationwide.

“We are pleased with the unanimous response, which underscores the value of this program,” said NTIA Administrator Lawrence E. Strickling. “This initiative will ultimately help us improve the Nation’s level of broadband access and adoption, which is critical to our global competitiveness.”

Once the mapping is complete, the goal is to have a public display showing where broadband is available, what technology provides it, and more.

Our Exabyte Future

By Bruce

The New York Times reports on a startling new study from United Kingdom research firm Coda. The study, “Mobile Broadband Traffic Across Regions 2009-2017,” predicts that in eight years mobile broadband users will be accessing enough video to total 1.8 exabytes of data — a month.

That’s over a quintillion bytes of data each and every month.

Workshopping a National Broadband Plan

By Bruce

This week’s national broadband plan workshop will cover “Broadband Consumer Context.” From broadband.gov:

This workshop will examine the broader context of the consumer experience from the perspective of the benefits it confers to consumers, the risks that may be associated with the benefits, and the obligations broadband connectivity may impose on consumers and institutions in an environment of pervasive data sharing and availability.

The workshop is scheduled for Wednesday, September 9 at 1:30 pm EDT. As always, more information—including how to watch the workshop via streaming video—can be found on the national broadband plan website.

More Input Needed

By Bruce

With the deadline for a final national broadband plan quickly approaching, the FCC continues to ask for public input. On Friday, the agency posted two public notices, one asking for ideas about smart grids, the other telework.

A Fall Full of Workshops

By Bruce

The FCC has announced it will be continuing its national broadband workshops through September and October. Among the topics to be discussed are online content, the need for robust wireless broadband, cybersecurity, the digital divide, and the economics of competition.

A Lack of Spectrum

By Bruce

Spectrum is one of our country’s most vital natural resources — and right now, we’re running out of it.

With the popularity of mobile broadband rising, the major carriers are warning that unless more spectrum is freed up, they won’t be able to keep up with demand. And as Fierce Wireless reports, their carriers’ concerns have gotten the attention of the FCC.

Your Thoughts on the Broadband Workshops

By Bruce

If you’ve been following the FCC’s national broadband plan workshops either in person or online, the commission would like to hear from you. Specifically, they’d like to know your thoughts on how the workshops have been going, and how they can improve in the future.

Information on how to put in your two cents can be found at the FCC broadband blog.

Civic Engagement 2.0

By Bruce

A surprising new study from the Pew Internet & American Life Project finds that those who have embraced email and social networking in order to be involved in local and federal government have pretty much the same profile as those who have traditionally done so. From the study (pdf):

Contrary to the hopes of some advocates, the internet is not changing the socio-economic character of civic engagement in America. Just as in offline civic life, the well-to-do and well-educated are more likely than those less well off to participate in online political activities such as emailing a government official, signing an online petition or making a political contribution.

The Internet offers much potential for citizens to become engaged with local and federal government. But while expanding broadband access to every corner of the country can certainly help spur interest, until people outside of the traditional demographic find a reason to become engaged—which is something candidates and government entities should definitely be exploring—the web’s full civic engagement potential will remain untapped.

Workshopping a National Broadband Plan

By Bruce

Here’s the schedule for this week’s National Broadband Plan workshops:

Tuesday, September 1

State and Local Governments: Toolkits and Best Practicies — 2 pm EST.

Wednesday, September 2

Benchmarks — 1:30 pm EST.

Thursday, September 3

Best Practices/Big Ideas — 9:30 am EST.

More information—along with archived videos of previous workshops—can be found on the FCC’s broadband.gov website.

More Workshops on the Way

By Bruce

The FCC has already conducted 16 on the national broadband plan. But they’re not stopping there. Multichannel News is reporting that more workshops will be occurring through September and on into the fall.

Some of the topics proposed: the role of content, cyber security, and civil rights.

Numbers of the Day

By Bruce

With the (twice extended) deadline for the initial round of federal broadband grants having come and gone, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration has released some numbers. From the NTIA release:

• More than 260 applications were filed solely with NTIA’s Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP), requesting over $5.4 billion in grants to fund broadband infrastructure projects in unserved and underserved areas.

• More than 400 applications were filed solely with RUS’s Broadband Initiatives Program (BIP), requesting nearly $5 billion in grants and loans for broadband infrastructure projects in rural areas.

• More than 830 applications were filed with both NTIA’s BTOP and RUS’s BIP, requesting nearly $12.8 billion in infrastructure funding. (Applicants for infrastructure projects in rural areas must apply to BIP but were given the opportunity to jointly apply to BTOP in case RUS declines to fund their application.)

• More than 320 applications were filed with NTIA requesting nearly $2.5 billion in grants from BTOP for projects that promote sustainable demand for broadband services, including projects to provide broadband education, awareness, training, access, equipment or support, particularly among vulnerable population groups where broadband technology has traditionally been underutilized. (The Recovery Act directs NTIA to make at least $250 million available for programs that encourage sustainable adoption of broadband services, of which up to $150 million is allocated in this first round of grants.)

• More than 360 applications were filed with NTIA requesting more than $1.9 billion in grants from BTOP for public computer center projects, which will expand access to broadband service and enhance broadband capacity at public libraries, community colleges, and other institutions that provide the benefits of broadband to the general public or specific vulnerable populations. (The Recovery Act directs NTIA to make at least $200 million available for expanding public computer center capacity, of which up to $50 million is allocated in this first round of grants.)

All told, over 2,000 applications for grants were submitted. As for what companies and groups applied, the site Unstrung has started compiling a handy list.

Tiny Cameras, a Potential Ton of Data

By Bruce

GigaOm looks at a promotion by online retail giant Amazon for small and cheap digital camcorders and wonders whether an explosion in their popularity will lead to headaches for Internet Service Providers. Since footage from the camcorders is meant to be downloaded to computers and shared with others—over email, through social networking sites, etc.—the more popular (and cheaper) they get, the more data could potentially be traveling through the “tubes.”

What’s interesting about this is that it casts a light on a major challenge both for ISPs and America’s digital infrastructure. Expanding and beefing up networks is expensive and time consuming, and while digital camcorders won’t likely grind the web to a halt, they are just one of the many ways data-intensive video is now making its way online. Because of this, investment in capacity should not only be made, but heavily encouraged. Otherwise, we risk the Internet backbone not being able to keep up with innovation.

Keeping Citizens Informed

By Bruce

Information Week reports on innovative online efforts by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to combat the H1N1 virus (also known as “Swine Flu”):

Central to the campaign is putting information on other Web sites, rather than requiring people to come to CDC.gov for information, said Janice Nall, director of the CDC’s e-health marketing division. “We’re trying to reach people where they are, not necessarily expecting them to come to us,” she said. “All of our distribution is on channels that people are already using.”

To get the word out—and most importantly, keep hysteria to a minimum—the agency plans on using everything from YouTube, Twitter, e-mail, and even texting to keep citizens informed. It’s an ambitious and extremely smart plan, and the CDC should be commended.

Hearing From Those Who Need Help

By Bruce

Last week, IIA Broadband Ambassador Craig Settles participated in one of the FCC’s National Broadband Plan workshops, where he spoke about low adoption and the benefits of increased broadband use. All in all, Settles found the workshop to be a positive experience. But as he notes on his blog, simply talking about a plan isn’t enough. Writes Settles:

Our national broadband policy could put us on track to transform millions of lives and businesses in hundreds of communities. Or it could be great mental gymnastics that many look back on one day and wistfully ponder what could have been. I lean toward the former with a couple of cautions.

One suggestion Settles has is for the workshops to not be limited to the traditional players, but rather, be open for the people a national broadband plan is meant to help—and the FCC may have to go to them:

The value of the workshops to date will be doubled or tripled if the FCC brings the people with the pain into the needs analysis process. But you have to go to them. As I said last week in my FierceBroadband column, go into formerly un- and underserved rural and urban areas that now have effective community-driven broadband networks. See firsthand what technologies they’re using, how these technologies were selected, what were the challenges to implementing the technology, what are the challenges to keeping everything operational and current.

Settles is right. As the FCC continues its workshop program — and especially with regional workshops having been planned for the coming months — hearing from those without broadband access is going to be very important if a national broadband plan is going to work.

What is Broadband?

By Bruce

That’s what the FCC would like to find out—and they’re asking for input. From a Public Notice (pdf) issued by the agency:

In this first Public Notice, we seek tailored comment on a fundamental question—how the Plan should interpret the term “broadband” as used in the Recovery Act, recognizing that our interpretation of the term as used
in that statute may inform our interpretation of the term in other contexts. In particular, the Recovery Act requires the Commission to develop a “national broadband plan” that seeks to ensure “access to broadband capability” for the entire United States. An understanding of what constitutes “broadband” thus is essential to evaluating the extent to which “broadband capability” is available, and informs the evaluation of particular policy approaches intended to ensure access to broadband capability. The National Broadband Plan NOI observed that “broadband can be defined in myriad ways,” and sought comment on possible approaches. We now seek more targeted comment on three aspects of this issue: (1) the general form, characteristics, and performance indicators that should be included in a definition of broadband; (2) the thresholds that should be assigned to these performance indicators today; and (3) how the definition should be reevaluated over time.

The Demand Must Be There

By Bruce

While close to 90% of Americans now have access to broadband, a reported 37% still don’t subscribe to the service in any form. And as Computer World reports, during yesterday’s FCC workshop on the national broadband plan, getting those non-subscribers online should be a focus of any plan on the table:

[M]any who don’t subscribe believe broadband is too expensive or don’t see the benefits, several speakers said at a broadband workshop hosted by the FCC. The agency, tasked with developing a national broadband plan by early next year, needs to show the benefits to those nonsubscribers, particularly elderly people, ethnic minorities and some people in rural areas, they said.

Also taking part in yesterday’s workshop was Successful.com President (and IIA Broadband Ambassador) Craig Settles, who spoke about the need to ensure communities have a stable broadband provider:

“If you can’t get the networks built, and if you can’t get an operator or a community to run that network year after year because they can’t get enough individual subscribers, the network itself is going to fail, and all of the rest of this discussion isn’t going to matter,” [Settles] said.

Broadband in Rural America

By Bruce

A new study from the United States Department of Agriculture examines the effect broadband has on rural communities:

In general, rural America has shared in the growth of the Internet economy. Online course offerings for students in primary, secondary, post-secondary, and continuing education programs have improved educational opportunities, especially in small, isolated rural areas. And interaction among students, parents, teachers, and school administrators has been enhanced via online forums, which is especially signifi cant given the importance of ongoing parental involvement in children’s education.

Telemedicine and telehealth have been hailed as vital to health care provision in rural communities, whether simply improving the perception of locally provided health care quality or expanding the menu of medical services. More accessible health information, products, and services confer real economic benefi ts on rural communities: reducing transportation time and expenses, treating emergencies more effectively, reducing time missed at work, increasing local lab and pharmacy work, and savings to health facilities from outsourcing specialized medical procedures. One study of 24 rural hospitals placed the annual cost of not having telemedicine at $370,000 per hospital.

The full USDA study, “Broadband Internet’s Value for Rural America,” is available on the department’s website.

Sitting Out in San Francisco

By Bruce

Ever since the federal broadband grant rules were released, a controversy has brewed over the definitions of “unserved” and “underserved” communities, with officials in a number of urban areas worrying that the definitions, as currently worded, would leave their communities out in the cold.

Now, Business Week reports, the city of San Francisco—which despite being known as a technology hotbed still has areas in need of broadband access—is sitting out the initial round of grants:

To qualify for funding, applicants need to prove they’re catering to an “underserved” area. Yet the National Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA), which is overseeing the program, defines underserved as one where at least half of all households lack broadband, or where fewer than 40% of households subscribe to broadband, or a place where no service provider advertises broadband speeds of at least 3 megabits per second. In a densely populated city like San Francisco, where telecom providers like AT&T (T) and Comcast (CMCSA) widely advertise residential broadband all over the city, it’s hard to point to a place that technically meets the “underserved” definition.

Business Week contacted a spokeswoman for FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and was told that the commission won’t comment on the broadband grants process. The NTIA was a bit more forthcoming:

Mark Seifert, senior adviser to NTIA director Strickling, says potential applicants should nevertheless file an application and make the best case possible. He says a good way to make the case is for applicants to take surveys among the local population to see what kind of service is available. But the priority, he says, is for bringing broadband to places where it’s either not available at all or only marginally available. “We know that this program alone will not achieve the President’s goal of broadband for everyone,” Seifert says. “We have limited dollars to invest, and we have a directive from Congress and the public record telling us to invest it in areas that are unserved or underserved.”

Taking a Pass

By Bruce

Qwest Communications has announced it will not be applying for the first round of federal stimulus grants. Reports Denver Business Journal:

Denver-based Qwest (NYSE: Q), the nation’s third-largest local phone company, sat out the first round and appears to have joined the ranks of telecoms that would like to see the rules changed for future rounds of the broadband stimulus program.

“We continue to support the use of program proceeds to facilitate the deployment of broadband services to unserved consumers,” said Steve Davis, Qwest’s senior VP for public policy, in a written statement. “However, upon evaluation of the funding opportunity and the various requirements for participation, we were unable to make the business case for filing an application for more rural opportunities.”

FCC Staffing Up

By Bruce

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has announced the senior staff members who will help craft America’s National Broadband Plan. From the FCC press release:

“A brilliant team of senior staff has been assembled who possess the deep and wide-ranging expertise necessary to assess the nation’s broadband needs and help bring high speed, affordable broadband to all Americans,” Chairman Genachowski said. “I am grateful that these individuals have already proven their commitment to this daunting task by agreeing to work under the pressing deadline of delivering a plan to Congress by Feb. 17, 2010. Developing the National Broadband Plan will require enormous effort on the part of dozens of current FCC staff who will be enlisted to contribute their talents, ideas, and insights for this initiative. And I am delighted by the decision of so manyof others to set aside their successful ventures in the private sector to also join in serving the public interest. Broadband is our generation’s major infrastructure challenge and it is a top priorityto craft a National Broadband Plan that will unlock opportunity, foster innovation and investment, and improve the lives of all Americans.”

Read the full FCC press release (PDF).

Workshopping a National Broadband Plan

By Bruce

Starting tomorrow, the FCC will be hosting a series of workshops in Washington D.C. to educate and gather ideas on a national broadband plan. The first workshop will focus on civic engagement and e-government, and will feature speakers like United States Chief Information Officer Vivek Kundra, the American Enterprise Institute’s Norman Ornstein, and United States Deputy Chief Technology Officer for Open Government Beth Noveck, among others.

Full information on the workshops can be found at the FCC’s national broadband plan site. And if you’re unable to make it in person, don’t worry—the workshop will also be available for viewing online.

A Drop in the Broadband Bucket

By Bruce

Business Week has crunched some numbers in an attempt to find out just how much it would really cost to bring broadband to every American. By their estimates, the initial $7.2 billion allocated in the federal stimulus, while certainly a large figure, won’t nearly by enough:

Many estimates say that about 40 million U.S. households may be unserved or underserved by broadband networks and that providing those homes with broadband connections will cost about $1,500 per household. That comes to $60 billion at minimum, since this math excludes the money consumers will need to spend to acquire PCs and other computer gear.

The $60 billion estimate also excludes the cost of bringing users who are in areas served by slow broadband connections up to the emerging national standard. Our best estimate of the minimum capital requirement is about $120 billion. This assumes substantial provision of wireless Internet service to rural homes and elsewhere, which is contingent on making available more radio spectrum.

Technology and geography are major contributors to the expense. While the hurtles aren’t insurmountable, it’s going to take major investment from both government and private industry to make a true national broadband plan a reality.

Educating About Broadband

By Bruce

Geoff Daily of App-Rising brings up a good point: communities that land under the category of un-served and underserved should be educating their citizens about the benefits of broadband. And they should start doing it right away.