By Robert D. Atkinson, Daniel Castro and Stephen J. Ezell
Spurring investments in IT infrastructure not only can provide an important short-term boost to the U.S. economy; it also can lay the groundwork for long-term economic growth, international competitiveness, and significant improvement in Americans’ quality of life.
Broadband network deployment projects represent large scale, long term investments that affect the overall productivity of economic activity in the geographic areas in which they are built, and thus fit the conventional definition of infrastructure. But they also have several characteristics that distinguish them from traditional infrastructure projects. These unique characteristics may dictate that government programs in support of broadband deployment be structured differently than conventional infrastructure programs.
Examples of opposition to North Carolina HB 1587:
Barack Obama’s current platform on technology including his perspective on broadband.
Peregrine Financial announced its intention to move the company headquarters from downtown Chicago to the Beaver Hills area of Cedar Falls. The project is expected to have a total economic impact of $124 million per year, thanks in large part to the Peregrine executives who are expected to move with the headquarters and their average yearly compensation of approximately $200,000 each.
James Baller, founder of the US Broadband coalition, discusses efforts to lobby Congress and the Administration of President-elect Barack Obama for a National Broadband Strategy. Anne Veigel of Communications Daily, is co-host. Program from Saturday, Dec. 13, 2008.
Letter sent to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
In an unprecedented display of consensus, a broad and diverse array of groups concerned about America’s broadband future will release a Call to Action that provides President-elect Obama and the incoming Congress a policy framework for a comprehensive national broadband strategy.
On December 8, 2008, the US Broadband Coalition presented the following Call to Action to President-elect Barak Obama and Congress at an event on Capitol Hill.
In late 2006, following a decision by the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in American Council on Education v. FCC, broadband service providers nationwide were suddenly presented with a new and extensive federal mandate. Under the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (CALEA), by May 14, 2007 facilities-based broadband and VoIP service providers were to ensure that their networks are technically capable of providing certain surveillance capabilities to law enforcement, potentially at great expense, or face the prospect of incurring a fine of up to $10,000 per day. Over the intervening months, those service providers who were aware of the new requirements have expended substantial resources simply to determine how and whether to comply, in addition to the direct expense of any technical solution they may be compelled to implement.
In October 2006 and January 2007, Casey Lide and I wrote two articles arguing that the United States should promptly develop a national broadband strategy, as the other leading nations are doing.1 In the first article, we focused on America’s pressing need for rapid deployment of high-capacity next generation networks, and in the second article we proposed an ambitious 8-step plan to make national broadband planning a reality. Since then, a large and growing number of organizations and individuals have voiced support for a national broadband strategy, and a small but vocal opposition has emerged. This paper summarizes the main arguments on both sides and shows that the opponents are wrong on multiple levels.