[ NNSquad ] Re: [IP] FCC Hires Industry Shill to Develop US National Broadband Plan

[Rahul Tongia <tongia@cmu.edu>]

I don't wish to comment on anyone's position, bias, etc.  I do want to share something on facts/statements.

I shared a panel with Dr. Scott Wallstein at the FCC's en banc hearing in Pittsburgh last year.  I will share two reactions:

1) He stated that broadband is doing OK, and we just don't have the data to make fair comparisons (esp. across countries) where methodologies and data differ.  Correct - to some extent.  But by that token, instead of the situation being "not as bad" it might be much worse than we think!

2) I presented on costs of exclusion from networks, and he said even if that were true, which might be, there is an enormous opportunity cost for extending broadband. For starters, the costs of exclusion are not only high, but disproportionately higher for certain classes and geographies of users. Second, the costs of extending broadband aren't as high as people might think, and they are artificially high. This excludes the "mother of all opportunity costs"....

I will reiterate my discussion from the FCC.  I showed a slide with infant mortality rankings, where the US is anywhere between 42 and 52 in the world.  To me that is a bigger deal than broadband ranking (somewhere close to 19-25 depending on the data).  It's not as if healthcare is bad in the US, it's just bad for particular sets of users (or non-users).  So how is it countries like Nicaragua can do better? Some have specialized policies for improving infant mortality. Each pregnant mother gets 3 home visits by a paramedical worker (assigned to a small number of homes). They get information, vitamins, etc.  This is easy, cheap, and worthwhile. In its absence, DC has worse infant mortality than Beijing.  I similarly advocated several specialized technologies (e.g., modified power levels for radios in rural areas) and policies (e.g., open access) for fixing the US broadband challenge.  

More details on my CMU webpage (which is hopeless outdated...):

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rtongia/web2/FCC.html#FCC-Comments

Rahul

Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 18:32:15 -0400
From: David Farber <dave@farber.net>
Subject: [IP] FCC Hires Industry Shill to Develop US National Broadband Plan
Reply-To: dave@farber.net
To: ip <ip@v2.listbox.com>



Begin forwarded message:

From: dewayne@warpspeed.com (Dewayne Hendricks)
Date: August 28, 2009 9:27:11 PM EDT
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <xyzzy@warpspeed.com>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] FCC Hires Industry Shill to Develop US National
Broadband Plan

FCC Hires Industry Shill to Develop US National Broadband Plan
by: Chris Bowers
Fri Aug 28, 2009 at 16:28

<http://www.openleft.com/diary/14837/fcc-hires-industry-shill-to-develop-us-national-broadband-plan
>

The FCC's broadband task force is tasked with developing our national
broadband policy. This is a project that FCC Commissioner Michael Copps
ranks of the highest importance:
"I'm enthused as I can be that this country is finally, finally going to
develop a national broadband plan," Copps said Wednesday in an interview
for C-SPAN's "The Communicators" series.(...)
"We're way behind in broadband," he said. "There is a need to do something
now."

Copps said he is not underestimating the importance of the FCC's task:
"It's the biggest thing that's come to the FCC since I've been there," he
said.

And so, because our government is run by corporations and for corporations
even when it is controlled by Democrats, a telecom industry shill, Scott
Wallstein, was named as economics director of that task force.  From a
source close to the process, in the extended entry I proivde a thorough
background on Wallstein's industry connections and long history of fighting
against American consumers:

Wallsten is a guy who:
       • Has spent the last five years at three different coin-operated think
tanks.
               • Most recently with the Technology Policy Institute whose supporters
include AT&T, Comcast, T-Mobile, Time Warner Cable, Verizon
               • He previously worked for the Progress and Freedom Foundation whose
primary funders include AT&T, Comcast, Cox, NCTA, Time Warner Cable,
Verizon. (Source)
               • Before that he worked for the American Enterprise Institute/Brookings
Institution whose funders include AT&T, SBC, Verizon. ((Source)
       • Doesn't believe there is a broadband problem in America . Point 1 would
explain this belief, Here's some of the industry and GOP-friendly positions
he's taken
               • "... the U.S. does not have a broadband problem. The remarkable
investment in broadband infrastructure and rapid increases in
subscribership that have taken place suggest the market is working well.
Any policy or regulation intended to further accelerate deployment should
clearly identify and target the market failure it is intended to mitigate:"
(Source)
               • "The wireless industry exhibits no evidence of a market failure, and
regulations - especially sweeping ones of the type [Tim] Wu would like us
to consider - are likely to impose significant costs on society and
ultimately harm consumers." (Source)
               • He frequently uses long discredited FCC data to state the broadband
market is full of competition and advocates for the fingers-crossed
approach to competition. (Source and source).

[snip]RSS Feed: <http://www.warpspeed.com/wordpress>




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

----- End forwarded message -----