#universalbroadband

          The Federal Communications Commission’s role is to address issues of communications and technology within our nations. They have recognized the Digital Divide and the lack of infrastructure necessary to end this issue as one of their main focuses. In doing so, the FCC led by Chairman Julius Genachowski, have introduction a National Broadband Plan to ensure every American has “access to broadband capabilities”[1]. In addition Congress has required that this plan include a strategy for providing affordable access and maximizing use of broadband to advance “consumer welfare, civic participation, public safety and homeland security, community development, health care delivery, energy independence and efficiency, education, employee training, private sector investment, entrepreneurial activity, job creation and economic growth, and other national purposes.”[2] This plan hopes to provide all Americans with the ability to participate in our digital society. This plan reaches all most all areas of our society and could make great strides in closing the Digital Divide.

The Plan

This plan seeks to use the government’s influence over the Broadband environment in order to achieve their goals. They have listed a number of ways in which this is possible.

Design policies to ensure robust competition and, as a result maximize consumer welfare, innovation and investment.

Ensure efficient allocation and management of assets government controls or influences, such as spectrum, poles, and rights-of-way, to encourage network upgrades and competitive entry.

Reform current universal service mechanisms to support deployment of broadband and voice in high-cost areas; and ensure that low-income Americans can afford broadband; and in addition, support efforts to boost adoption and utilization.

Reform laws, policies, standards and incentives to maximize the benefits of broadband in sectors government influences significantly, such as public education, healthcare and government operations.[3]

These are the main points of their action plan. They revolve around the ways in which they can influence the private industry to provide broadband service to areas that are not as profitable as others. Rural areas with low populations and less income are not as profitable to corporations for laying down the cables and other infrastructure to provide broadband. Through the policy actions of Congress they may be able to influence these companies to expand into areas that are currently un-serviced. Policy plans such as allowing state and local governments to provide Internet access and developing disclosure requirements to ensure consumers have the pricing and performance information they need are amongst a few that are more specifically detailed in the plan.

The Goals 

      In addition to have a comprehensive plan, the FCC has also outlined a series of goals that they hope to achieve with the National Broadband Plan. These goals are not only related to increased infrastructure but developments in fields such as education, healthcare, and public safety.

Goal No. 1: At least 100 million U.S. homes should have affordable access to actual download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second and actual upload speeds of at least 50 megabits per second.

Goal No. 2: The United States should lead the world in mobile innovation, with the fastest and most extensive wireless networks of any nation.

Goal No. 3: Every American should have affordable access to robust broadband service, and the means and skills to subscribe if they so choose.

Goal No. 4: Every American community should have affordable access to at least 1 gigabit per second broadband service to anchor institutions such as schools, hospitals and government buildings.

Goal No. 5: To ensure the safety of the American people, every first responder should have access to a nationwide, wireless, interoperable broadband public safety network.

Goal No. 6: To ensure that America leads in the clean energy economy, every American should be able to use broadband to track and manage their real-time energy consumption.[4]

What we see in these long term goals are a variety of specific interests that I believe the average person does not recognize, despite their general knowledge of the Digital Divide. We see right away in the first goal that the speed of American’s Internet needs to be at 100 megabits per second. Details such as this show how broad the idea of the Internet and Broadband is, and how the varying levels of access make a large difference in the service that is provided. It is not enough to just make the goal to provide access but we must include the speed as well. Those who currently do have access to the Internet, likely do not consider what it is like to have the lower levels of broadband speed. Low speed Internet makes a large difference in what you are able to do with your broadband. Other topics outline in their goals that I found particularly interesting is the emphasis on the safety of Americans. I believe that social media and other forms of online interaction are untapped areas of provide information about emergency situations. Though many College campuses, including The University of Richmond use emergency text alerts to provide information to students in emergency situations. [5] 

What we see through the action plan and goals in the National Broadband Plan is a detailed strategy in order to provide Internet access to millions of Americas who are currently without it. This movement is very similar that what occurred in the electricity a century ago. Broadband is the foundation of economic growth, job creation, global competiveness, and a better way of life in our current generation. I highly recommend exploring the National Broadband Plan website, while this post covers the highlights of the program, website is incredible detailed and provides in depth information into the current progress of the program.

Work Cited

"National Broadband Plan - Executive Summary." National Broadband Plan - Executive Summary. The Federal Communications Commision, n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2014. 

"Signing Up/Updating Information." UR Alert System Sign Up. The University of Richmond, n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2014.

[1] "National Broadband Plan - Executive Summary." National Broadband Plan - Executive Summary. The Federal Communications Commision, n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2014.

[2] “National Broadband Plan- Executive Summary.”

[3] “National Broadband Plan- Executive Summary.”

[4] “National Broadband Plan- Executive Summary.”

This past February the battle between telecommunications giant Verizon and New York Mayor Bill De Blasio took a new turn. The Major singled out Verizon during his campaign and during this week, stating that he will seek to compel the company to offer FiOS service to New Yorkers who can not afford the current rates.  

Mayor de Blasio has often accused Version of failing to meet their bench marks set out in 2008 that by mid 2014 they will make broadband available to all city residents. While Verizon says that they have been on schedule with rolling out their fiber optic cable, they have met some difficulties entering apartment buildings, which requires owner’s permission.

This situation once again brings up the issue of responsibility. The Mayor of New York calls the inability to have high speed Internet an “economic and social justice issue”. He uses rhetoric of human rights and necessities when talking about Internet access. The issues that arises here is that social and economic justice are often fought out in court. We see a disconnect between a service the government deems to be a necessity and sometimes a right, and the private sector industry who is trying to make a profit.

Mayor De Blasio also brings up the issue of wealth inequality and how it is widened due to lack of Internet access. He states, “there is wide agreement in the tech community that access to high-speed Internet is key to economic mobility”. The inability for lower income areas to have Internet access will prevent them from rising above their own situations and won’t allow them to compete in the current economy. He believes that city has the leverage to require such a large corporation to accommodate that demands he is seeking. This type of rhetoric illustrates the relationship between Politicians and CEO and the types of arguments that arise. It will be interesting to see how this situation plays out within Verizon’s public policy and humanitarian efforts and the threats and actions of the New York City government.