Okay, here’s a quick quiz. How many communications services (newspapers, television or radio stations, or broadband networks) in the U.S. are owned, operated or controlled by the federal government? The answer is none.
But if Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Kevin Martin has his way, the FCC would hand over about 25 megahertz of spectrum to one single party that promises to build a national wireless network with the requirement that the company dedicate up to 25 percent of that spectrum for broadband service, and that it would share advertising revenues with the federal government. In other words, the federal government would be going into business with a broadband provider—and a new and unproven one at that.
And it gets better!
In full blown statist, central-planning mode, the FCC would require that this network reach 50 percent of the population in four years and 95 percent of the population in 10 years.
How to justify the entrance of a government competitor into a clearly vibrant and successful broadband marketplace? Martin told the Associated Press that he is “ . . . supportive of the cause of providing a lifeline broadband service across the country.”
This is a solution in search of a problem. Broadband penetration is already deep and growing fast. As the states unfetter their communications marketplaces, broadband competition is booming.
WebProNews’ Mike Sachoff reported on April 15 that, according to Scarborough Research, broadband penetration in the U.S. is up 300 percent since 2002, with almost 49 percent of all adults already having broadband (cable modem penetration has increased 188 percent and DSL connections are up 575 percent ). We are at the FCC’s desired penetration levels already. A simple straight-line projection shows penetration at almost 90 percent by 2014—four years before the FCC wants us at 95 percent. The private sector is well ahead of the central planning sector.
But that’s not all!
The Martin plan creates several other legitimate concerns, not least of which is censorship. If the federal government imposes filtering requirements on the lifeline portion of the network—to protect children from undesirable sites—they will be venturing into First Amendment territory.
But wait, there’s more!
The frequencies proposed in the plan would be significantly close to frequencies currently used by cellular companies. That creates the possibility that cellular users would experience interference on their communications. Imagine, a federal government-mandated plan unnecessarily interfering with wireless callers in order to provide lifeline service at levels at or below today’s penetration rates.
Only the federal government could concoct such a plan. We can only hope that more reasonable minds prevail at the FCC. Oops, wait a minute . . .