National Broadband Plan
Summit Speakers Want More Broadband Access For Minorities, Criticize Net Neutrality
WASHINGTON, November 18, 2009 – The opening speaker of a summit focused on improving broadband penetration to minority and low-income areas of the country, and criticized advocates of Net neutrality for being out of touch with the needs of minorities, as he attempted to enlist the mantle civil rights leader Martin Luther King into his cause.
“[L]et us remember the worlds of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., ‘All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face-to-face with another problem,’” said Julius Hollis, the founder of the Alliance for Digital Equality, in prepared remarks.
“If we fail to find common-ground on the issues before the U.S. Federal Communications Commission relative to the rulemaking governing broadband adoption, the financing of broadband infrastructure and the over-arching issue of net neutrality, the long-term socio-economic chaos that will be inflicted upon our society would be far too devastating to comprehend,” warned Hollis.
WASHINGTON, November 18, 2009 – The opening speaker of a summit focused on improving broadband penetration to minority and low-income areas of the country, and criticized advocates of Net neutrality for being out of touch with the needs of minorities, as he attempted to enlist the mantle civil rights leader Martin Luther King into his cause.
“[L]et us remember the worlds of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., ‘All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face-to-face with another problem,’” said Julius Hollis, the founder of the Alliance for Digital Equality, in prepared remarks.
“If we fail to find common-ground on the issues before the U.S. Federal Communications Commission relative to the rulemaking governing broadband adoption, the financing of broadband infrastructure and the over-arching issue of net neutrality, the long-term socio-economic chaos that will be inflicted upon our society would be far too devastating to comprehend,” warned Hollis.
Hollis delivered his remarks Wednesday during his group’s 2009 Minority Broadband Summit, which was held at the Newseum with roses on the table and a view of the Washington skyline.
Hollis dove into the issue of Net neutrality or whether the FCC should step in and regulate internet access to ensure an “open internet” further by noting that Alliance for Digital Equality has joined 72 Democratic members of Congress to ask the FCC to take a balanced approach in their rulemaking “to ensure that well-intended policies won’t have the net effect of dislodging minorities and low income communities, who are more adversely and disproportionally impacted due to broadband escalating costs.”
Hollis said that internet service providers should not “abuse the public trust of deliberating fostering traffic shaping over the Internet in order to stymie political or civic discourse or discriminate against low-income consumers.”
On the Alliance for Digital Equality Web site, the group describes (http://www.alliancefordigitalequality.org/news_details.php?sid=2255) its position on the net neutrality issue. “Most arguments for network neutrality fail to account for the very real economic constraints facing the disadvantaged, underserved, and un-served communities that we and the [Congressional Black Causus] represent.”
The group continues – after taking a slam at so-called “net roots” activists – that “our constituents are more at risk of being blocked from participating in the digital future due to rising price pressures and lack of investment in broadband infrastructure precipitated by ill-conceived, empirically unsupported, and hastily formulated regulations than a slowly loading web page.”
During the summit, CNN Contributor Roland Martin, who moderated the conference, joked that the term “Net neutrality” means nothing to the average person and the debate needs to be discussed in a way people can understand.
During the morning panel representatives from companies discussed ways they were getting Internet tools out to minorities and panelists emphasized the importance of improving broadband access in the U.S.
The “digital revolution” will “truly enhance political and civic discourse in our nation, as well as potentially temper the polarization of some of our cultural differences, which have been cleverly used for political gains by surrogates in order to allow a few amongst us to economically prosper for untold generations to come,” said Hollis.
Larry Cohen, president of the Communications Workers for America – which has not been seen as an advocate for Net neutrality – noted that it will take hundreds of billions of dollars, mostly from the private sector, to get the Internet where it should be.
Jay Sanders, president of the Global Telemedicine Group, referred to broadband as the “umbilical cord” for healthcare. Tony Clayton, chairman of the Southern University System, said cell phones are being used to fight crimes in the south.
Victoria DeFrancesco Soto, a professor with Northeastern University, said she thinks part of the challenge in increasing broadband penetration is that not everyone sees the “relevance of the Internet” or the value it could add to their daily lives.
Gregory Fehribach, an attorney, said that 70 percent of people with disabilities are underemployed or not employed and that the struggling economy has hit this group of people more than anyone else. Not only does internet access enable people with disabilities to search for jobs but it “may be the only type of interface these people have with the outside world,” he said.
Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, stopped in to mention how important broadband access is to lessening the digital divide. He said he likes the quote from Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates that “The Internet is becoming the town square for the global village of tomorrow.”
Broadband Mapping
In Discussing ‘Broadband and the Biden Administration,’ Trump and Obama Transition Workers Praise Auctions

November 22, 2020 – In the event that the incoming administration of President-elect Joe Biden seeks substantial funding for broadband infrastructure, there is a strong likelihood that such monies would be channeled through a reverse-auction mechanism, said panelists at the Broadband Breakfast Live Online event on November 11.
See more from Broadband Breakfast Live Online, including “Broadband and the Biden Administration, Part II,” on December 2, 2020.
In a discussion with Broadband Breakfast Editor and Publisher Drew Clark, two broadband policy experts who served on the transition teams for Donald Trump and Barack Obama, respectively, championed the role of such a mechanism as efficient and fair.
Previous attempts to run funding through other selection processes provided funds only to the well connected, claimed to Mark Jamison, research and education director at the University of Florida, and who served on then President-elect Trump’s 2016 transition team.
Places with a Democratic governor or a congressman of either party that sat on a powerful committee were funded more often compared to other regions, Jamison said.
Whether or not funding mechanisms were in fact biased in that way, both Jamison and Technology Policy Institute President Scott Wallsten both praised the transparency and economic efficiency of the Federal Communications Commission’s reverse-auction funding mechanism.
Wallsten, an economist who was involved in the transition for then President-elect Obama, and who also served on the National Broadband Plan implemented in the first year of the Obama administration, criticized the Rural Utility Service and the old funding process of Universal Service Fund. Both said under these mechanism, a lot of money is spent without good information about how such funds are awarded or distributed.
Wallsten and Jamison agreed that more data would help make broadband funding more effective, they also said that the FCC was right to move forward with its Rural Digital Opportunity Fund auction on October 29 – part of the new auction-based approach to the Universal Service Fund – despite imperfect mapping.
In part, this was because any inadequacy of mapping data can be resolved in the challenge process, said Wallsten. Additionally, it is not clear that auctions like RDOF, or the Connect American Fund auction in 2018, would have yielded better results had the FCC waited to update their maps.
Jamison and Wallston also projected how the Biden administration might tackle net neutrality, Section 230 and antitrust regulation.
Jamison said that if the Biden administration reinstitutes net neutrality, it will quickly see that that won’t work very well.
Wallsten said that if it’s reinstituted the debate will be different than in the past. A large part of net neutrality is paid prioritization where third parties can pay ISP’s to put their content “at the front of the line.” He said that the pandemic has demonstrated why no paid prioritization may be a mistake, as many people need guarantees of stable connection for their schooling and telehealth applications.
Wallsten also noted that many made doom and gloom forecasts when the Trump administration FCC removed net neutrality protections in December 2017. None of those predictions came to pass, he said.
Both also agreed that the FCC should not be involved the regulation of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects tech platforms from liability for user-generated comments.
They also were wary of changes to the consumer welfare standard governing antitrust because, said Jamison, “If you’re not regulating for consumers, who are we regulating for?”
See “Broadband Breakfast Live Online on Wednesday, November 11: Broadband and the Biden Administration,” Broadband Breakfast
“Broadband and the Biden Administration” is sponsored by:
As with all Broadband Breakfast Live Online events, the FREE webcasts will take place at 12 Noon ET on Wednesday.
SUBSCRIBE to the Broadband Breakfast YouTube channel. That way, you will be notified when events go live. Watch on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.
See a complete list of upcoming and past Broadband Breakfast Live Online events.
National Broadband Plan
National Broadband Plan Has Held Up Well, With Notable Downsides, Say Authors

June 29, 2020 — The National Broadband Plan has been successful, despite notable downsides, said panelists in a Federal Communications Bar Association webinar on Friday.
The plan, first released ten years ago, aimed to increase competition, provide lower-cost service to more Americans and decrease regulatory barriers to broadband rollout.
“Ten years in this space in terms of technology is remarkable,” said Rebekah Goodheart of Jenner & Block. “At the time only 15 percent of people had access… of 25 megabits… The fact that this plan was able to stand up through time shows how visionary it really was.”
“All the stuff that we’re taking for granted now are things that came out of recommendations from the plan,” she added.
Participants noted that, despite broadband access deficiencies amid the coronavirus, “overall broadband adoption rates [are] going up reasonably well right now,” said John Horrigan, Senior Fellow at the Technology Policy Institute.
But there are still significant barriers to unfettered telework capabilities, he said.
“We’re also waking up to the fact that smartphones, as useful as they are, have significant limitations for completing homework,” he said.
Ruth Milkman of Quadra Partners agreed.
“There’s a lot of stuff you can’t do on a smartphone,” she said. “It’s hard to read papers… and there are data caps, and it can be quite expensive if you try to use it in the same way that you would use a fixed wireline network.”
Blair Levin, non-resident Fellow at the Metropolitan Policy Project of the Brookings Institution, said that sections of the National Broadband Plan held up remarkably well, even ten years later.
“In the healthcare section which says, ‘We really need to utilize telehealth because someday there’ll be a pandemic’… it does look very prophetic,” he said.
Despite the proactivity of the policy, Levin said, it has certain shortcomings that the FCC should address.
“We’ve become much more aware in this society of different ways in which our institutions do not include everyone and lead to inequalities,” he said. “I would argue that absolutely needs to be a new plan… now it’s more important than ever because we recognize the importance of closing that digital divide.”
Digital Inclusion
Authors of the 2010 National Broadband Plan Say That a ‘Refresh’ Should Not Only Be Up to FCC

WASHINGTON, March 4, 2020 – Panelists at the INCOMPAS policy summit Tuesday looked back with fondness on the Federal Communication Commission’s National Broadband Plan that was released 10 years ago this month. They agreed that if the plan is refreshed, the FCC should not be the lone agency to lead in the changes.
The 10-year-old plan was designed to “ensure robust competition” and “maximize the benefits of broadband,” while fostering the spread of broadband across the country, said INCOMPAS General Counsel Angie Kronenberg.
New Street Research Policy Analyst Blair Levin, who led the plan’s development, called it a “three-act play.”
The first act was the hiring people. The second act was holding hearings and acquiring data. The third act was an extensive writing process, Levin said.
When asked how the United States is doing in regards to the plan, Levin said there have been great improvements and some complications.
Mattey Consulting Principal Carol Mattey who worked on the plan, said it was a “long and evolutionary process,” that often required “nitty gritty details” from complex concepts.
Technology Policy Institute Senior Fellow John Horrigan, who also worked on the plan, said that while the statistics do not show a large increase in Americans that have wireline broadband at home, smart phones and mobile devices have made a huge difference.
Even so, Horrigan admitted that for children who have to do homework at home, smart phones are not enough.
However, Horrigan said the way that policy makers understand and think about the digital divide has improved.
A decade ago, city mayors were not concerned about digital inclusion, and now that has changed, said Horrigan.
Levin disclosed his frustration with the “metrics” section of the plan. The availability of bandwidth should not hinder economic growth, said Levin. But, “fundamentally we’ve made progress,” Levin admitted.
“The regulatory process is too slow to catch up,” and legislators are hesitant to look so far in the future while also considering cost concerns, said Mattey.
Looking ahead to a possible refresh of the plan, Horrigan said the FCC should not be the sole organization reworking the document.
Levin agreed and added that broadband has changed over the past decade as well. He called broadband a “mixed bag.”
The whole federal government should be thinking about how to revive the plan and take into consideration cybersecurity and privacy, Levin advised.
-
Fiber4 weeks ago
‘Not a Great Product’: AT&T Not Looking to Invest Heavily in Fixed Wireless
-
Broadband Roundup3 weeks ago
AT&T Floats BEAD in USF Areas, Counties Concerned About FCC Map, Alabama’s $25M for Broadband
-
Big Tech2 weeks ago
Preview the Start of Broadband Breakfast’s Big Tech & Speech Summit
-
Big Tech4 weeks ago
House Innovation, Data, and Commerce Chairman Gus Bilirakis to Keynote Big Tech & Speech Summit
-
Big Tech3 weeks ago
Watch the Webinar of Big Tech & Speech Summit for $9 and Receive Our Breakfast Club Report
-
#broadbandlive2 weeks ago
Broadband Breakfast on March 22, 2023 – Robocalls, STIR/SHAKEN and the Future of Voice Telephony
-
Infrastructure1 week ago
BEAD Build Timelines in Jeopardy if ‘Buy America’ Waivers Not Granted, White House Budget Office Told
-
#broadbandlive3 weeks ago
Broadband Breakfast on March 8: A Status Update on Tribal Broadband