Tag Archives: Internet

Establishing Internet as a Utility – This is Big!

internet-logos-1024x643Quito   In the midst of so much tragedy at the massacre of almost 50 LGBT men and women at a nightclub in Orlando and the horror and insensitivity of the Trump and Republican response, it was still possible to find a bright spot in the news: a federal court has backed policies establishing the internet as a utility.

It was not just any court either, it was the highly influential United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, one of the most prestigious in the country. By a 2-1 vote on the panel, the judges in an 184-page decision came down solidly with the people rather than the industry by holding that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rightly can regulate the internet and assure net neutrality, because in fact the internet is not a luxury good, subject to special pricing and plundering by cable companies, but a utility, necessary for all the people.

This doesn’t close the door. There will likely be an appeal of course to the Supreme Court, but it opens many doors that might include more expansive rulings by the FCC that the internet is not only a utility, as a vital communication and consumer tool, but a public good that should be regulated accordingly and done so aggressively.

At one level this is something we all knew. Applying for jobs, getting through school, applying for many public benefits for the poor, keeping up with friends, and even the news of the nation, is increasingly impossible without the internet. The federal government’s investment in recent years to extend access to the internet to more rural areas and to public schools and libraries was evidence of this, even while being a subsidy for private carriers.

Interestingly, there are signs that the recognition of the public utility nature of the internet may be trickling down. On the one hand the FCC is talking about loosening the restraints that private internet providers have managed to lobby through many state legislatures to block municipalities from establishing their own systems to insure that all their citizens have affordable, high speed access. On the other, I got a press release the other day that the Ouachita rural electric cooperative in southern Arkansas of all places had partnered with an outfit so that it could extend internet services to 9000 families lacking access in the footprint of the cooperative. That would be a nice idea to catch on fire with other cooperatives that are sitting on money and unclear what to do with it other than pay their directors.

So, sure, we all hate utility companies and there have been thousands of campaigns to try and get them to be more accountable, provide better service, and affordable or lifeline rates, but if there’s one thing we’ve learned to hate even more than the local telephone, gas, or electric company, it’s the profiteering cable companies. With this decision we can hope their time in the sun and at the trough is finally coming to an end, so that all the people can access and afford the internet, because it’s a utility operating as a public good and necessity as well.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Only One Hand Clapping for FCC Expanded Lifeline Rule for Internet

indexNew Orleans   FCC Chairmen Tom Wheeler claimed the decision to expand Lifeline programs from telephones to the internet was a major breakthrough in closing the digital divide. This was a 3-2 decision on party lines. The majority at the FCC claim that this broadening application of the subsidy will “help millions of low-income households connect to the internet.”

The New York Times noted that “only about 40% of families making less than $25,000 a year can afford broadband while 95% making over $150,000 have high-speed internet at home.” The program will provide a monthly subsidy of $9.25 to access broadband. The eligibility for the program will begin with those eligible for either food stamps through the SNAP program or veterans benefits.

This must be a good thing, right? Why are we not applauding or at best have only one hand clapping this new FCC initiative?

Let’s look at just some of the reasons.

First, this program will NOT close the digital divide, and the subsidy is basically a subsidy for internet providers like Comcast, Times-Warner, Charter, Cox, and others, more than it is a subsidy for lower income families.

Why do I say this?

Well, let’s please remember that analysts argued several years ago when the FCC required Comcast to establish a $10 per month program for lower income families as a condition of approving their acquisition of Universal, that Comcast would still make money on internet even at $10. This program will be almost a ten dollar subsidy for a family to access broadband, which in plain English means of course that the internet provider will be charging more, and potentially way more, for the service while the $9.25 knocks a bit off the bill. In the run-up to the FCC’s action some argued that average basic internet bills were running $30 to $40 per month. Knock a ten-spot off of that bill, and we’re still talking about families pushed up against the wall having to come up with another twenty or thirty bucks. And, I’m not even talking about the cost of installation or whether or not the family has a computer. This is just not going to happen.

And, will this be “high-speed” just like those 95 percenters have who are making $150,000? I doubt it. In Canada for several years after we got Rogers to agree to a $10 per month plan in public housing in Toronto, we were constantly arguing with them about issues of speed. One or two megabytes per second is not enough to stream or download or do most web-based homework. The FCC action was silent on this issue.

One-hand clapping might say this is better than nothing. Maybe. But, the fact that internet providers are not complaining should be a clue, friends and neighbors. They are glad to get their hands on some of the billions that had been solely subsidizing phone service for some lower income families. The Comcasts don’t sell phones and phone service, so this is all good news for them.

For lower income families this new program will mainly be another myth where they are playing Tantalus and trying to reach the grapes, always out of reach.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail