April 6, 2009 12:00 PM PDT

FCC to begin broadband policy overhaul

by Marguerite Reardon
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 11 comments

The Federal Communications Commission is set to start holding hearings on how to spend taxpayer money on building and upgrading broadband access in the U.S.

The $787 billion stimulus package passed by Congress earlier this year calls on the FCC to come up with a road map for how billions of dollars in government money should be spent to improve broadband in the U.S. The FCC has until next February to come up with a plan, and it's starting to hold hearings on Wednesday to discuss what will hopefully become a national broadband strategy.

As part of the process, the agency will look at ways to improve broadband coverage so that people living in rural areas have access to high speed Internet. And it will also be looking at ways to improve the speeds of existing broadband infrastructure. The FCC will also consider updating outdated communications policies to make them more relevant as more Americans get communications and TV service from non-traditional companies.

Many telecommunications experts say the new broadband framework being laid out will be the biggest task the FCC has handled since implementing the Telecom Act of 1996.

But getting the road map in place will likely spur heated debate among consumer groups and cable and phone companies, especially when it comes to controversial issues such as Net neutrality. Several consumer groups have already suggested that the government impose requirements on any money given as part of the stimulus package to ensure that Internet service providers keep their networks open. These groups don't want cable or phone companies blocking new services offered by competitors.

Phone and cable companies argue that imposing new regulation or laws could preclude them from managing their networks and therefore would stifle investment in this area. They are lobbying Congress and the FCC to ensure that stricter rules are not put in place.

Congress has allocated $7.2 billion for broadband as part of the overall stimulus package, but the issues that the FCC is hammering out will likely entail billions more of investment from the government in the future. Most likely, future funding will come from revisions to the Universal Service Fund.

This fund was originally created to help provide telephone access to rural Americans. But now it looks like the fund will be expanded to also provide funds for expanding broadband services. But this, too, is likely to be controversial, as rural phone and wireless companies would likely receive less money from the fund if it was expanded to cover broadband.

Marguerite Reardon has been a CNET News reporter since 2004, covering cell phone services, broadband, citywide Wi-Fi, the Net neutrality debate, as well as the ongoing consolidation of the phone companies. E-mail Maggie.
Recent posts from Wireless
Android and iPhone users not so different after all
AT&T resumes online iPhone sales in NY
GSM crypto code cracked, engineer says
AT&T ceases online iPhone sales in NY area
FCC member berates Verizon for termination fees
Web-based Lookout protects mobile devices, data
iPhone + robot marimba player = instant band
Google Nexus One hands-on
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (11 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by gonzales27 April 6, 2009 1:11 PM PDT
I sure hope this works out better than the Do Not Call episode, those people living in rural areas need broadband
Reply to this comment
by Lerianis3 April 6, 2009 9:52 PM PDT
I don't think it will. I might be being a pessimistic jerk there, but I don't think that it will. Most likely, they will give this money to the Comcast's and AT&T's and tell them "Please extend your services all around the United States!" and those companies will just stuff the money into their pockets and run.
by sythara April 6, 2009 1:56 PM PDT
This is going to be a disaster, just as with any other program thats done by the Gov't on this scale. Why can't they just leave it to businesses and the free market.
Reply to this comment
by skillingssucks April 6, 2009 2:09 PM PDT
You have no idea what you're talking about.
by Lerianis3 April 6, 2009 9:53 PM PDT
I have to agree with skillingsucks here. They HAVE left it to the businesses and the free market...... only to see NOTHING HAPPEN. This is one time that federal mandates and programs to start building wires all across the United States is a good thing.
by Endbringer April 7, 2009 5:37 AM PDT
I have family that live in the mountains of Virginia. The town they live in has 998 people. The entire county has maybe 15,000 people. There is no cable or DSL available to them simply because the infrastructure costs outweigh whatever they could charge for the usage. What I don't understand is, why can't they get satellite internet? That is available almost everywhere, including these rural areas the FCC is talking about. So why is the government going to put a gun to my head to pay for someone who lives in a rural area to have cable or DSL? The internet is not a "right" guaranteed by the Constitution.

That same county doesn't even have cell phone access at the state park. Now that is something that would be worthy of my tax dollars as that would be a safety issue. Faster internet does not involve public safety.
by TotallyMadeUpName April 7, 2009 7:02 AM PDT
Does that town in Virginia have telephones? Do you think the phone companies just sucked it up and didn't complain about "infrastructure costs"? Or did the government say, "There's going to be telephone access in every city and town in the USA".

As we march forward, broadband access is going to be just as important as telephone access. The fact that the United States ranks behind most technologically advanced countries in the world in braodband access should tell you that something is wrong which the "free market" has not been capable of correcting.
by Endbringer April 7, 2009 11:27 AM PDT
@ TotallyMadeUpName

You're missing the point about the telephone service. That town and area have telephone lines not because of public funds, but because the cost to provide the infrastructure were much lower later on. The private sector was able to fulfill the telephone service gap. Broadband is no where near being as important as phone service and even then phone service is not something that is essential. Using your logic then the government ought to make sure everyone has a car. Cars are arguably much more "important" than phones, yet you don't see a concerted effort to take tax dollars to make sure everyone has a car. (Ignore what Obama has done with GM, please.)

Tax dollars should only be spent on public uses as per the Constitution. Building roads, schools, jails, courthouses, rest stops, etc. are all public uses. Taking my money through the police power of government to make sure someone who lives in a rural area of Virginia or Washington has broadband internet is not in the public interest to someone who lives in Tennessee or New York. Nor is it a public use.
by lcaswell_dotmac April 7, 2009 7:13 AM PDT
The government definitely needs to step in here. My wonderful ISP Time Warner Cable (Roadrunner) in Rochester, NY has decided to impose a 40GB cap ($1/GB extra on overages) on their service in the fall - and there's no other decent high speed ISP's in the area. The other cities Time Warner are doing this in (Beaumont TX, Greensboro NC, Austin TX and San Antonio TX) are also cities where TW has very little or no competition.

If these trials succeed you can be sure YOUR local ISP will be following suit.

See http://www.stopthecap.com for more info and get involved now before it's too late.
Reply to this comment
by financialtools1 April 7, 2009 1:22 PM PDT
Thanks, Marguerite!

Keep track of this issue because since the appointment of the new FCC chairman it's clear that the USA will never get real Broadband, now more than ever , what a shame ! and when we hear today's news about Australia installing a national network of 100 Mbps with 31 billion dollars, what an insult to the the country that invented the Internet, the USA, we will never get true broadband, just more proprietary cable or proprietary FIOS ,higher prices and more wireless content control, that's all....but please stay on this issue which is vital for all and for the USA Economy, for the Health IT ( where they just put another cable guy to spend 19 billion taxpayers dollars !!! ) and the new jobs that we need so badly....a sad day for the USA !
Reply to this comment
by Robert_Naramore April 8, 2009 7:42 AM PDT
It is going to be a fight here in Tennessee to get access to broadband wireless or not. Lewis County Tennessee is mostly of middle age to the older generation. My family (in-laws) as most people in Lewis County are bull headed and dislike change with a passion.
I'm wondering how to advocate here in this county for a rural broadband infrastructure.
Reply to this comment
(11 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.

About Wireless

Check out the latest wireless news on CNET News, featuring the latest news on cell phones, mobile gear, VOIP, and internet access via broadband and wireless connections.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Wireless topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right