Increasing Broadband Is Good... But The Devil's In The Details

from the boondoggle-central dept

Tue, Dec 30th 2008 4:38pm — Mike Masnick

In general, it seems like a good thing that President-elect Obama has identified improved broadband as a key issue to focus on in the new administration. Broadband infrastructure is becoming critical infrastructure to any successfully functioning economy these days, and boosting our overall broadband is a necessity in trying to open up new economic possibilities. However, as with any government-sponsored program, when the government suggests it's ready to open its massive wallet on an initiative, special interests, incumbents and lobbyists see it as a way to get free money from the government. This is the problem in any sort of announced plan to give away money for infrastructure projects. It's not that the infrastructure isn't important. It's incredibly important. It's just that the system is often so corrupt that plenty of taxpayer money is likely to end up in the hands of those who need it the least, and who won't actually spend it to do much on infrastructure. We've seen broadband boondoggles like this in the past -- such as the Universal Service Fund, that really turned into a massive slush fund for telcos to charge more to customers without doing much of anything to provide universal service. I'm hoping that any plan this time around would be different -- and I've heard from multiple different people involved in the Obama transition team who insist that it really is different this time -- but some things are hard to change, and this sort of sucking at the government teat is hard to stop.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: broadband, infrastructure investment, lobbyists

8 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

DS, 30 Dec 2008 @ 5:50pm

This is DS from the future...

"I'm hoping that any plan this time around would be different"

It wasn't.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 31 Dec 2008 @ 12:07pm

the answer is simple
don't pay the telcos to do it. don't even let them submit bids.

get someone else to do it. the telcos are so corrupt that a monkey with brain damage could build more infrastructure for less money than any telco.

if the telcos resist, quadruple their taxes. in fact, quadruple their taxes now, and then quadruple them again if they complain or resist.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Dec 2008 @ 7:46pm

interesting... I could have sworn there were more comments this morning.

Would you like to explain the change Mike?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Dec 2008 @ 7:47pm

Re:
my mistake... Wrong story...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Jan 2009 @ 11:24am

No Govt Money Needed
No government money is needed to increase broadband availability. What is needed is less government interference. In particular, the government protected local monopolies that the telco and cable companies enjoy should be eliminated. The public infrastructure right of ways should be opened up to all who want to build competing systems.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
anonymousJack, 3 Jan 2009 @ 7:22am

NOLA Homeland Security and Microsoft
As one of those closely tied to the DOJ Homeland Security Grant competition process that took place in New Orleans Louisiana that would have provided interoperable communications for 5000 first responders from 150 agencies a full two years before Hurricane Quatrain, I can only validate that corruption transcends local, regional, state and federal levels. Likely this extrapolates to international as well. It is sad that Microsoft (as detailed in the Times Picayune by reported Gordon Russell and likewise reported by Frontline) continues to treat "security" with a "shoulder shrug." Business' special interests are tantamount to having a "special education" student generating policy. Simply look at George W. Bush's comments to LSU graduates early in his first term to get to the route of the issue "Not bad for a C-student (chuckle, chuckle)."

In my experience, the only way "average" meets with abnormally high degrees of success repeatedly is through the coordinated tactics normally associated with "the mob." The mere fact that Narus STA 6400 technology was deployed to a company formally dismantled by "antitrust law" was reassembled to be larger than ever before is evidence enough that the major corruption taking place is that of a Machiavellian "the ends justifies the means" hijacking of the American Moral Code of Conduct. Makes Bernie Madoff's rip-off look like child's play
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AnonymousJill, 3 Jan 2009 @ 7:27am

Re: NOLA Homeland Security and Microsoft
I can only agree that the "quatrain" was FEMA - or what we in New Orleans touted as: Fix Everything My Ass!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jan 2009 @ 8:52am

Re: the answer is simple
I don't know what world you live in, but in what I like to call the Real World, you raise taxes and business passes those costs on. So that means that not only does your phone bill go up, but your cell phone bill and internet and hosting costs go up since thier access to infrastructure also goes up. And now your small businesses that use the internet to provide services, or share information between sites, or whatever have higher overhead because again, businesses pass cost along. Now since they are small businesses they normally can not afford to pass those costs along if someone like Walmart is thier competition.

So is this really your simple answer? Make more people dependent on big business and goverment jobs or government aid when costs go up and small business folds?

Make it so all the small businesses close and everyone shops and works at Walmart?
[ link to this | view in thread ]