Think tank urges federal investment in broadband infrastructure

A paper published this week by the Center for American Progress concludes broadband deployment cannot be left in the hands of the private sector. This policy has left much of America unable to access advanced telecommunications services and placing the nation at a competitive disadvantage to other industrialized nations.

Instead, the United States should undertake a massive federal investment in advanced telecommunications infrastructure using a variety of technologies on a scale like the Eisenhower administration's National Highway Program in the mid 1950s that built America's interstates.

Writes Mark Lloyd, author of the paper, Ubiquity Requires Redundancy The Case for Federal Investment in Broadband:

The United States will not meet President Bush’s goal of universal broadband by the end of 2007—not by a long shot. The number of subscribers to Internet services is growing faster than the adoption of “dial-up,” yet for the most part these subscribers are not connected to the broadband technology Congress described in 1996 as a two-way communications service capable of high-speed delivery of data, voice, and video.

This failure to connect over half the country to advanced telecommunications service is not a technological failure. It is a 21st century public policy failure. In the 1990s, policies established by the Clinton administration to encourage public/private telecommunications partnerships, to connect schools and libraries to the World Wide Web, and to allow competitive service providers onto the networks of the local telephone monopolies all sped up the deployment of broadband around most of the nation. These policies were either deliberately abandoned or hampered by the Bush administration.

Will state broadband build out incentives be enough?

As states gear up public-private partnerships to provide incentives to broadband telecommunications providers to build out their incomplete infrastructures, the question of whether these programs will be sufficient arises.

In allocating $5 million in seed funding for competitive grants to research, design and implement accessible Internet for unserved and underserved areas of rural and urban New York, Gov. Eliot Spitzer made clear the funds would not be used to build needed digital infrastructure. "Instead, state money will be used to leverage matching funds from the private and not-for-profit sectors," Spitzer noted. "In the end, it is New York's vibrant telecommunications sector—together with their tireless and invaluable workers—who will implement this vision in partnership with government."

But will telecom providers respond to the state incentives and will relatively paltry sums such as New York's $5 million begin to make a dent in the billions that are needed to bring a metal wire-based telecom infrastructure built decades ago for an analog, pre-Internet era technologically up to date? Especially considering that America's existing telecom infrastructure is already at least a decade behind where it should be to meet current needs and becomes increasingly obsolete as demand for high speed Internet access at greater bandwidth grows.

As this reality is confronted, a number of public policy options emerge. Should the states float multi-billion dollar bond issues – perhaps combined with tax breaks -- to provide low interest loans to telecommunications providers in order to provide more patient capital that the providers themselves cannot access given their short-term earnings horizons?

Or might these state-level efforts prove inadequate, providing too little money over too long a period to fund the massive investment that should have been made a decade or more ago in order to bring America's telecommunications system to the point where it should be today? It certainly seems likely, which would lead to calls for the federal government to step into the gap.