MuniWireless

A growing number of business and political leaders are calling for a national broadband policy. In fact, the U.S. descent as a world leader in broadband could be far deeper than this week’s OECD data indicate.Reactions are coming fast and furious in response to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development report this week revealing that the United States has slipped from 12th to 16th among its 30 member nations in broadband penetration, down from fourth in 2001.

My own is that the OECD data was really very kind to the failed lack-of-policy not coming out of Washington. Check the list of nations among the OECD’s 30 members and note who’s missing. The only OECD representatives from the Pacific Rim are South Korea and Japan.

Singapore with its burgeoning economy and plan for ubiquitous free hot spot coverage is absent. So is India with its proposal to provide free broadband access free to all residents by 2009 at impressive speeds of 2 MBps. Throw those countries in the mix and the U.S. ranking takes a deeper dive. The Point Topic report, which includes Singapore and other Pacific Rim nations–and pegs U.S. standing at 25–paints a much truer picture.

Nevertheless, the U.S. State Department appears to be attempting to blunt the criticism of the failed U.S. “hands off” approach by attacking the OECD’s methodology. In a letter to the OECD’s secretary general this week, David A. Gross, the U.S. coordinator of international communications and information policy, pointed out that the OECD’s data does not reflect broadband on campuses and in corporations.

A defensive response is to be expected from someone whose job it is to put the nation’s best foot forward. However, Gross does make a good point that I’d like to see the OECD address–that is, to revise its methodology and include businesses and campuses to provide the most complete picture of broadband penetration. This would certainly be welcome in the U.S., considering that policy makers have gotten sorry little useful data from the FCC.

Nevertheless, the call for a national broadband policy intensified on Capitol Hill as both the Senate and the House held hearings this week. Below, you’ll find a short summary with links to reports on the arguments of both sides.

PCMagazine, a publication that does not typically indulge in political commentary, summarized the Senate testimony. It reported “a U.S. innovation brain drain, coupled with sloppy government handling of subsidy programs and data collection, have contributed to a decline in the country’s broadband standing.”

Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D. Haw.) told the panel: “Today, we see less of the visionary, long-term research that took place at Bell Labs and resulted in the breakthrough technologies that made our communications industry the envy of the world. Instead, competition has forced companies to focus on research tied to short-term returns. While this strategy may be good for the bottom line, it sacrifices any chance our nation has to operate as the test bed for new technologies and applications that will be developed in the new economy.”

Not everyone shares those views.

In remarks to the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Telecommunications , Congressman Fred Upton, the ranking Republican on that committee, said (in so many words that traced the nation’s difficulties back to decisions made by the previous administration) the best policy is no policy: “We at long last have a semblance of a national broadband policy that promotes competition, is pro-investment not anti-investment, and that imposes minimal government regulation upon broadband services and facilities.” (He’s right. That is what we have–and the continuing downward spiral of the U.S. reveals the degree to which it has failed.)

Citizens Against Government Waste (a non-profit group that, according to SourceWatch, has campaigned for the tobacco industry and Microsoft and against open source software) issued a statement urging both houses to continue to neglect the situation, saying “The Internet has thrived in America precisely because it has been free from government interference.”

BusinessWeek, in an analysis of free market activities and the impact they are having on the market, concluded: “Making broadband more widely available at lower prices could create demand for new types of digital products, but first the warring corporate interests and the Federal Communications Commission, the nation’s top telecommunications regulator, will need to agree on changes to ensure it happens.”

link

Related posts:

1. Cisco CEO calls for U.S. national broadband policy
2. International broadband standings challenged
3. U.S. trails other nations in broadband use and growth