Costly oil will fuel public policy push for universal broadband access

The Los Angeles Times is out with a look ahead at how Americans' lives will change with $200 a barrel oil and $7 a gallon gasoline if it reaches those price points -- which would represent an exponential increase considering oil was going for just $20 a barrel at the beginning of 2002.

I predict that if this unpleasant circumstance comes about, it will provide a big boost to telecommuting and other forms of using telecommunications technology to bridge distances rather than fuel consuming transportation. That in turn will create a major public policy push for rapidly upgrading the nation's incomplete telecommunications infrastructure to ensure every American has access to high speed Internet -- possibly on the scale of the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 -- only this time involving fiber optic cable instead of concrete and blacktop.

On July 16, 2008, Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine citing rising fuel prices and the escalating cost of commuting to work, announced a telework initiative for gubernatorial appointees, which includes about 120 employees in the Cabinet and Governor's Office. Kaine also announced an improved State Telework Policy directing all state agencies to consider ways to improve and expand agency telework and alternate work schedule programs.

In order for telework initiatives like Kaine's to work, Virginia and other states will have to ensure that their telecommunications infrastructures provide broadband access to all state residents. That means policies and incentives to rapidly deploy infrastructure to make telework possible and not simply engaging in studies and mapping broadband black holes that don't result in wider broadband access. Rising pump prices will likely add the necessary extra incentive to show real and timely progress.

U.S. Court of Appeals upholds FCC rule legitimizing broadband black holes

The Wall Street Journal reports today the U.S. Court of Appeals has upheld a Federal Communications Authority rule adopted in the spring of 2007 prohibiting local governments from imposing "unreasonable" requirements on telephone companies seeking franchises to offer enhanced broadband-based video services.

The rule is designed to stop local governments from using their FCC cable franchise granting authority to impose build out requirements on franchise applicants, preserving broadband black holes in these communities.

Here are the relevant excerpts from a previous post on the FCC rule.

U.S. suffers from "Neanderthal" broadband policy, critic charges

Stanford University law prof Larry Lessig suggested at today's announcement of the InternetforEveryone.org universal broadband access initiative at the Personal Democracy Forum in New York that the current U.S. policy treating broadband Internet access like a competitive consumer commodity isn't working and is keeping the nation stuck in the dial up digital dark ages.

"That Neanderthal philosophy has governed for about eight years, and it has allowed us to slide from a leader in this field to an abysmal position," Lessig said in a clear attack on the Bush administration's stance.

Internetnews.com reports the coalition, which includes Google and eBay, wants Congress and the next administration to take up the issue of broadband availability.

Vint Cerf, Google's chief technology evangelist and one of the architects of the Internet, implied that one of the key reasons for the lack of universal broadband access in the U.S. is that that the Internet, which carries multiple and unlimited forms of digital communications, is delivered by telcos and cable companies interested less in providing Internet access and more in selling particular services such as video and voice telephone connections.

Supreme Court to hear AT&T DSL anti-trust case

More than two decades ago, a federal judge ordered the breakup of AT&T after concluding Ma Bell's monopolistic control of local and long distance voice telephone service violated federal anti-trust law.

Now AT&T as the successor to SBC Communications faces another anti-trust suit that the U.S. Supreme Court decided to take up this week. The high court will review a Sept. 11, 2007 decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal in which the appellate court affirmed a U.S. district court ruling allowing an anti-trust action brought against SBC/AT&T by several Internet service providers to proceed.

The ISPs allege SBC/AT&T maintained unreasonably high wholesale access charges to ISPs to deliberately thwart them from competing with SBC/AT&T for Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) customers as permitted under the line sharing provisions of the federal Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996. Ma Bell then lowballed prices on her own DSL offerings, making it impossible for the ISPs to compete on price, the ISP plaintiffs complain.

The case, Linkline Communications et. al. v. SBC California, et. al. represents an important test of federal policy under the 1996 law intended to foster robust market competition and speed timely deployment of high speed Internet access to all Americans.

However the suit suggests SBC/AT&T's actions in response to the law have had just the opposite effect. By cutting its DSL prices to the bone in order to deter competing ISPs -- SBC/AT&T was promoting residential DSL for as little as $13 a month in late 2006-- it lacked adequate revenue to finance the expansion of DSL within its service territory. That led to the formation of monstrous broadband black holes filled with frustrated customers unable to order wireline broadband from AT&T at any price.

From Wilson, North Carolina to Washington: Broadband access a growing issue

Here's an exhausive, well written feature article by Fiona Morgan at INDYWeek.com replete with photos on the issue of broadband Internet access and how the North Carolina municipality of Wilson concluded broadband is an essential public utility and took matters into its own hands and built its own fiber optic based infratructure.

The story explains the reasons for America's incomplete telecommunications infrastructure and how policymakers are addressing the issue from Wilson city hall to Congress. Speaking of the latter, the story notes that lack of broadband is the top constitutent complaint for North Carolina Rep. Bill Faison, a House Democrat representing Orange and Caswell counties.

"I can't go to a public meeting anywhere in Orange or Caswell without someone coming up to me and saying, 'We've got a problem with Internet and here's what it is,'" Faison is quoted as saying. "No one comes up and says, 'We've got a problem with Medicaid,' or 'We've got a problem with the wildlife commission.' No one complains about the Department of Transportation not fixing a road in front of their house. They all show up and want high-speed Internet.'"

The harsh reality of surburban broadband

I recently pointed out the U.S. digital dividing line doesn't necessarily run between urban and rural areas as it's often less than accurately described in the media and by public policymakers. Rather than a hard "digital divide," the nation instead suffers from a shamefully incomplete last mile telecommunications infrastructure with more broadband service holes than a Swiss cheese. Anyone is vulnerable to winding up in a void -- even folks living in densely populated suburbs.

Here's a piece in ZD Net by Jason Perlow titled The harsh reality of suburban broadband that aptly illustrates the point. Perlow is fortunate that he at least even has broadband access via his cable provider. There are some suburban residents and people living in metro areas who aren't able to obtain any wireline broadband service at all short of ordering up a costly T-1 circuit from their telco.

California Broadband Task Force availability maps leave much to be desired

Drew Clark of BroadbandCensus.com blogged about last week's Broadband Policy Summit IV sponsored by Pike & Fischer. He quoted Jeff Campbell, senior director of technology and communications policy at Cisco Systems, as praising the report issued in January of this year by the California Broadband Task Force for producing "address-level" data about both broadband availablity and throughput speeds.

While the underlying data may be based on a given address, it did not produce maps of similar granularity. The wireline broadband availabilty maps produced by the task force cover such large geographical areas as to be practically useless. There are no reference points such as identification of major highways and towns, nor can a viewer zoom in to view what's available in his or her own neighborhood.

Instead of making useless maps our public policy should incentivize rapid broadband deployment given that much of the nation is years behind where it should be when it comes to broadband services.

AT&T's Web site engages prospective broadband customers in circular shell game

I recently ran a drill I've been running for the past four years to check wireline broadband availability on AT&T's Web site. The availability search engine would predictably come back with the news that DSL was "unfortunately" not available at my location. Unfortunate indeed since I was ready to order it in early 2003. I was then invited to register to be notified "if" DSL became available. In the meantime, the message suggested, I may qualify for satellite Internet. Newsflash to AT&T: In case you hadn't noticed, I don't live in the Arctic Circle; there's fiber just 1.5 miles from my location. I'll pass.

Then earlier this year, the DSL availability check produced a new message, sans the dubious invitation to go suck a satellite:

You may qualify for AT&T U-verse High Speed Internet and TV. AT&T U-verse is a bundled service of 100% digital high-speed Internet with TV that provides you the ultimate home entertainment experience.

If DSL becomes available at my location, Contact Me

I inquired with AT&T's U-Verse folks to see if I qualified for U-Verse. It should be available in 1-2 months, I was advised in an email. When I noticed no VRADs were being installed to deliver U-Verse's VDSL-based service, I asked about the 1 to 2 month timeframe.

That resulted in another email from Ma Bell:

Although service was estimated back in April to be available 1-2 months, it was just an estimation. Unfortunately, we are not provided with enough accurate information to be “positive” on the feedback we provide.

In the meantime, the latest from AT&T's Web site is I "may" qualify for U-Verse. Bottom line, no DSL and no U-Verse. As usual, the ever equivocal Ma Bell says maybe and that's final. She's all dressed up with nothing tangible to sell.

Update 6/30/08: Ma Bell has changed her mind -- again. Now I no longer "may qualify" for U-Verse as an alternative since DSL isn't offered. It's back to "Go suck a satellite." No wonder some wags have aptly dubbed U-Verse "Re-Verse:"

AT&T High Speed Internet

	Our system indicates that our DSL service, AT&T High Speed Internet, is not available at your location. However let's see if we have another solution for you: You qualify for Satellite Broadband from AT&T Learn More

Among the benefits AT&T touts of satellite is "Wide Footprint" because it can reach people even in remote locations. In my case, remote means two miles from a major U.S. highway with buried fiber cable plant along a frontage road 1.5 miles from my location. Gee, and here I thought I must be residing somewhere in the Arctic Circle.