Universal Service
Municipal Networks Offer Reachable Challenge of Serving the Unserved
SILVER SPRING, Md., March 30, 2009 – The morning session of the Freedom to Connect conference here probed the status and conditions of broadband quality and access in municipal America.
SILVER SPRING, Md., March 30, 2009 – The morning session of the Freedom to Connect conference here probed the status and conditions of broadband quality and access in municipal America.
Tim Nulty of East Central Vermont Fiber said that there might, finally, be a consensus on “a reasonable model” for municipal telecom in the United States right now.
“Close to 60% of the population in rural areas and municipalities still does not have access to broadband,” Nulty lamented.
Nulty castigated those dismissing the need to develop and deploy broadband infrastructure in unserved and underserved areas, saying their rationale was intellectually dishonest.
The idea that broadband for such areas was “infeasible” was mistaken, he said. It would be easier and cheaper to deploy fiber networks for the new technology much in the same was as it was to deploy copper lines for electricity countrywide.
Nulty said opposition to broadband development was coming from incumbent telecommunications companies with so much financially invested in the status quo.
Lev Gonick, Case Western Reserve’s chief information officer, urged a community model that might satisfy competing local interests.
Gonick said that counties, schools, local and regional governments, public and private libraries, and museums all stand to gain if broadband technology is deployed in underserved and unserved areas.
“Education and health care would be particularly important,” Gonich said, noting that those two policy areas are still a major concern in rural and municipal America.
During the public comment session, audience members said that if broadband development in rural America is going to be subsidized by public funds, it would be necessary to complement the effort with “public accountability.”
Others asked for a deeper examination of the social dimension of the telecommunications. Others called for consideration of future technological discontinuations.
In response, the panelists called for open access, due regard for underserved communities, and creating an enabling platform for a competitive community and strategy for the country.
FCC
The $3.2 Billion Emergency Broadband Benefit Program: What’s In It, How to Get It?

SILVER SPRING, Md., March 30, 2009 – The morning session of the Freedom to Connect conference here probed the status and conditions of broadband quality and access in municipal America.
Tim Nulty of East Central Vermont Fiber said that there might, finally, be a consensus on “a reasonable model” for municipal telecom in the United States right now.
“Close to 60% of the population in rural areas and municipalities still does not have access to broadband,” Nulty lamented.
Nulty castigated those dismissing the need to develop and deploy broadband infrastructure in unserved and underserved areas, saying their rationale was intellectually dishonest.
The idea that broadband for such areas was “infeasible” was mistaken, he said. It would be easier and cheaper to deploy fiber networks for the new technology much in the same was as it was to deploy copper lines for electricity countrywide.
Nulty said opposition to broadband development was coming from incumbent telecommunications companies with so much financially invested in the status quo.
Lev Gonick, Case Western Reserve’s chief information officer, urged a community model that might satisfy competing local interests.
Gonick said that counties, schools, local and regional governments, public and private libraries, and museums all stand to gain if broadband technology is deployed in underserved and unserved areas.
“Education and health care would be particularly important,” Gonich said, noting that those two policy areas are still a major concern in rural and municipal America.
During the public comment session, audience members said that if broadband development in rural America is going to be subsidized by public funds, it would be necessary to complement the effort with “public accountability.”
Others asked for a deeper examination of the social dimension of the telecommunications. Others called for consideration of future technological discontinuations.
In response, the panelists called for open access, due regard for underserved communities, and creating an enabling platform for a competitive community and strategy for the country.
FCC
What You Need To Know About the More-Than-$7 Billion Emergency Connectivity Fund

SILVER SPRING, Md., March 30, 2009 – The morning session of the Freedom to Connect conference here probed the status and conditions of broadband quality and access in municipal America.
Tim Nulty of East Central Vermont Fiber said that there might, finally, be a consensus on “a reasonable model” for municipal telecom in the United States right now.
“Close to 60% of the population in rural areas and municipalities still does not have access to broadband,” Nulty lamented.
Nulty castigated those dismissing the need to develop and deploy broadband infrastructure in unserved and underserved areas, saying their rationale was intellectually dishonest.
The idea that broadband for such areas was “infeasible” was mistaken, he said. It would be easier and cheaper to deploy fiber networks for the new technology much in the same was as it was to deploy copper lines for electricity countrywide.
Nulty said opposition to broadband development was coming from incumbent telecommunications companies with so much financially invested in the status quo.
Lev Gonick, Case Western Reserve’s chief information officer, urged a community model that might satisfy competing local interests.
Gonick said that counties, schools, local and regional governments, public and private libraries, and museums all stand to gain if broadband technology is deployed in underserved and unserved areas.
“Education and health care would be particularly important,” Gonich said, noting that those two policy areas are still a major concern in rural and municipal America.
During the public comment session, audience members said that if broadband development in rural America is going to be subsidized by public funds, it would be necessary to complement the effort with “public accountability.”
Others asked for a deeper examination of the social dimension of the telecommunications. Others called for consideration of future technological discontinuations.
In response, the panelists called for open access, due regard for underserved communities, and creating an enabling platform for a competitive community and strategy for the country.
Education
Sen. Ed Markey Celebrates Telecom Act as Telecom Lawyers Tell Congress to Be Specific

SILVER SPRING, Md., March 30, 2009 – The morning session of the Freedom to Connect conference here probed the status and conditions of broadband quality and access in municipal America.
Tim Nulty of East Central Vermont Fiber said that there might, finally, be a consensus on “a reasonable model” for municipal telecom in the United States right now.
“Close to 60% of the population in rural areas and municipalities still does not have access to broadband,” Nulty lamented.
Nulty castigated those dismissing the need to develop and deploy broadband infrastructure in unserved and underserved areas, saying their rationale was intellectually dishonest.
The idea that broadband for such areas was “infeasible” was mistaken, he said. It would be easier and cheaper to deploy fiber networks for the new technology much in the same was as it was to deploy copper lines for electricity countrywide.
Nulty said opposition to broadband development was coming from incumbent telecommunications companies with so much financially invested in the status quo.
Lev Gonick, Case Western Reserve’s chief information officer, urged a community model that might satisfy competing local interests.
Gonick said that counties, schools, local and regional governments, public and private libraries, and museums all stand to gain if broadband technology is deployed in underserved and unserved areas.
“Education and health care would be particularly important,” Gonich said, noting that those two policy areas are still a major concern in rural and municipal America.
During the public comment session, audience members said that if broadband development in rural America is going to be subsidized by public funds, it would be necessary to complement the effort with “public accountability.”
Others asked for a deeper examination of the social dimension of the telecommunications. Others called for consideration of future technological discontinuations.
In response, the panelists called for open access, due regard for underserved communities, and creating an enabling platform for a competitive community and strategy for the country.
-
Artificial Intelligence3 months ago
U.S. Special Operations Command Employs AI and Machine Learning to Improve Operations
-
Broadband Roundup3 months ago
Benton on Middle Mile Open Access Networks, CENIC Fiber Route in California, Investors Buying Bitcoin
-
Section 2304 months ago
President Trump’s FCC Nominee Grilled on Section 230 During Senate Confirmation Hearing
-
Artificial Intelligence2 months ago
Artificial Intelligence Aims to Enhance Human Capabilities, But Only With Caution and Safeguards
-
Broadband Roundup3 months ago
Trump Signs Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence, How Not to Wreck the FCC, Broadband Performance in Europe
-
5G4 months ago
5G Stands to Impact Industry Before Consumers, Says Verizon CEO Hans Vestberg
-
Fiber2 months ago
Smaller Internet Providers Were Instrumental to Fiber Deployment in 2020, Says Fiber Broadband Association
-
#broadbandlive4 months ago
Broadband Breakfast Live Online Event Series on ‘Tools for Broadband Deployment’ on Enhancing Rural America
2 Comments