Summary
1. The FCC sounds like it perhaps wants to put out kind of a “five-year plan” that is reminiscent of totalitarian governments. 2. The statement, “If the government were to suddenly suggest it will get into the business of deciding how networks should be designed, that would be chilling” – is the least that could be said. 3. It is one thing for the federal government to foster a new refinement of universal service – it is quite another to actually build the roadmap.
Analysis
That the “broader infrastructure plan is ‘the biggest responsibility given to the FCC since the Telecom Act of 1996,’” should not be a ringing endorsement. This particular act was instrumental in suppressing broadband development in the US. The government cannot shackle incumbent carriers and expect them to make extraordinary investments in infrastructure. It cannot be emphasized enough that Verizon did not start building fiber to the premises in such an unprecedentedly quick way until it in effect received a waiver from the conditions of the act.
The federal government is just too slow to adapt to changing market conditions. So, any plan that it will develop will be obsolete on day one.
With the Interstate Highway Act of 1956, it was not mandated precisely how to build the roads (other than general federal standards). The people in each of the states rightly made these decisions. In a similar way, the telecom providers need to be free (albeit with PUC oversight) to make their own choices.
