Transit and Broadband

Could it be that the right combination of crisis and consciousness will create the will to build passenger rail in Ohio? It seems every economist agrees that massive infrastructure spending is needed to get the economy growing again. The debate is over what to build or repair. As noted in the previous post, a likely candidate is broadband infrastructure.

But rail could be a beneficiary too. The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports:

Passenger rail service from Cleveland to Cincinnati could be a reality by 2010 if the state gets $100 million in proposed infrastructure stimulus money.

The Ohio Rail Development Commission also intends to apply next year for federal matching grants from a passenger rail bill passed by Congress this fall.

Now I am bit out of my expertise here but it seems that combining transportation corridors with ultra high speed public broadband access could provide a powerful nudge to mass transit use and sustainable development. Several cities in the US and abroad are offering free or low-cost public wifi on trains, light rail and even buses, giving commuters one more reason to get out of their cars. (See stories on San Francisco, Boston and Sweden).

And transit advocates are always pointing toward Transit Oriented Development (TOD) as the desirable outcome -- the hard core financial ROI -- of transit development. This is "the creation of compact, walkable communities centered around high quality train systems. This makes it possible to live a higher quality life without complete dependence on a car for mobility and survival."

Well, how about Broadband and Transit Oriented Development (BTOD)? Build a continuous network of human and digital connectivity. The allure of free or low cost, super fast broadband will be another incentive for citizens and innovative companies to locate near mass transit.

A good crisis should not go to waste. Let's get it right and build broadband and rail at the same time, laying the groundwork for 21st century economy and communities.

A glimpse of the future?

The Media Moment

No, it is not a moment of on screen performance but the opportunity to redirect media and internet policy in the United States. Media reform activists are energized by Obama's clear positions on preserving network neutrality, reversing policies promoting media consolidation, and rebuilding public media for the digital age.

The reform group Free Press just released a policy paper filling in some details of Obama's stated principles. It calls for:

• Protecting an Open Internet: The Obama administration should move swiftly to put Net Neutrality into law by urging Congress to pass Net Neutrality legislation.
  
• Promoting Universal, Affordable Broadband: The next FCC should set new speed standards for broadband; collect meaningful data on deployment; transition the Universal Service Fund toward broadband; and open inquiries to stimulate broadband competition.
• Increasing Diversity in Media Ownership: The road to media ownership reform begins by reversing the Bush administration's pro-consolidation policies. Obama's FCC should also investigate the impact of concentration on localism and diversity.
• Renewing Public Media: Urge Congress to substantially increase funding for all levels of public media; create a long-term funding strategy that protects public media from undue political interference and supports the digital transition; and promote new Low Power FM stations and existing PEG channels.

Broadband Stimulus

Some are arguing that building up the US broadband infrastructure should be a component of an economic stimulus plan. The US falls in the middle of the pack in terms of broadband adoption, with over 40 million people -- approximately 5 million in Ohio -- without broadband. Most communities have only one or two providers, a dearth of competition that keeps prices high and performance low. This compromises US competitiveness by limiting education, telemedicine, entrepreneurism and civic and economic participation.

In the National Governors Association letter to Congress Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania and Gov. Jim Douglas of Vermont wrote:

"[I]nvestments in ready-to-go infrastructure projects are a cost effective creator of high paying jobs. These investments should include a broad array of infrastructure projects including airports, highways, transit systems, clean water, sewers and broadband."

The Brookings Institute has released a study in which it estimates that each percentage point increase in broadband adoption results in nearly 300,000 jobs each year.

I think the most intersting argument is made by Yochai Benkler who argues for British-style federal effort to build fiber to the home aligned with a massive "each one teach one" effort to build up our nations math and science knowledge:

"We are happily contemplating paying people to dig up roads and pour cement. They will be building our physical infrastructure. There is no reason why we should not be equally happy paying people to teach, learn, and share what they learned. They will be building our knowledge infrastructure. Coupled with fiber to the home, by the end of the recovery we will have more of our population connected to much faster networks that will allow them to work from home, and they will be much better prepared to use that connectivity in a networked information economy."

Given Obama's seriousness about technology -- he plans to create a cabinet level Chief Technology Officer -- we could have very different media landscape in the near future.

Will the State of Ohio give away last bastion of local control?

Bill Callahan reports that legislation has been introduced that effectively eliminates local control and public interest requirements video franchises in the State of Ohio. Ohio Senate Bill 117, modeled after AT&T-backed legislation passed in Michigan, is intended sweeten the return on phone companies video over broadband services by eliminating local franchising. Cable companies are OK with that because once their local franchises end they will not have to renegotiate them. What will happen? According to Callahan:

... existing cable providers will stop talking to local governments, having no further reason to do so. Where franchises expire (as is now the case with Time Warner in Cleveland), the cable companies will go to the state Commerce Director for pro forma approval of new ones — standard ten year terms, no more citywide service obligations, no more demands for special services to municipal and school facilities, no more requirements to support community media access and technology programs, no negotiation of any kind. Where a franchise remains in effect, the cable company can walk away whenever it chooses, and “no provision of that franchise or agreement is enforceable” by the community.

Has your cable company agreed to pay a fee to support “PEG” (public, educational and government) access television facilities, as in Cincinnati? That agreement will be unenforceable.

Has your cable company agreed to offer digital cable service — which is necessary for broadband Internet access — to households in every neighborhood, no matter how poor? That agreement will be unenforceable.

Has your cable company agreed to provide free or discount service to municipal buildings, schools, libraries, and nonprofits? Or senior citizen discounts? That agreement will be unenforceable.

Has your cable company agreed in past franchise negotiations to provide special one-time grant support for community technology or minority television development, as in Cleveland in 2000? Never again.

Will the state, as the new franchising “authority”, be able to negotiate any of these (or other) public benefits on behalf of its communities? Absolutely not. SB 117 says the Commerce Director must approve any properly completed “video service authorization” request within twenty days of its filing, or it goes into effect anyway.
“The director has no authority to regulate video service in this state, including, but not limited to, the rates, terms, or conditions of that service.”

Let your state Senator know that broadband service is vital to the future of Ohio and that local communities have the right to negotiate for universal service and community media so all Ohio citizens can participate fully in our economy, educational system and culture.

Technorati Tags: Broadband, Franchising, Community Media, Bill Callahan, Ohio

House subcommittee to grill FCC on local franchising

[Update: this hearing was postponed. More info TBA.]

[Cross-posted to OneOhio]

The House Commerce & Telecommunications Subcommittee is scheduled to hold a hearing today, Thursday, Feb. 15th, to review the FCC. Among the many issues of concern is the FCCs December 20th FCC Ruling on Video Franchising. The ruling:

(1) imposes a 90-day shot clock for new entrants with existing rights of
way;
(2) requires the grant of a new entrant’s franchise after 90-days;
(3) limits the scope of a new entrant's build-out obligation;
(4) authorizes a new entrant to withhold payment of fees that its deems to be in excess of the 5 percent cap;
(5) undermines support for public, educational and government (PEG) access channels PEG and local, institutional networks (INET);
(6) authorizes a new entrant to refrain from obtaining a franchise when it is upgrading mixed use facilities that will be used for the delivery of video content.

FCC Commissioner Adelstein offered these dissenting comments:

“The policy goals of this Order, to promote competitive video offerings and broadband deployment, are laudable. But while I support these goals, today’s item goes out on a limb in asserting federal authority to preempt local governments, and then saws the limb off with a highly dubious legal and policy scheme that substitutes our judgment as to what is reasonable for that of local officials – all in violation of the franchising framework established in the Communications Act.”

Commissioner Copps dissented and wrote:

"My goal was to encourage an item that preserves a local authority’s statutory right to seek specific and far-reaching build-out requirements, protects each community’s ability to negotiate for PEG and I-NET facilities, and maintains truly meaningful local ability to deal with the huge companies that are coming into our cities and towns toPublish build important infrastructure."

Save Access.org has a online letter writing tool you can use to voice your opinion with the key house members of the subcommittee.

Technorati Tags: FCC, Broadband, Telecom

John Dingle on National Braodband Strategy

Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) has piece in The Hill entitled affordable broadband for everyone. He writes:

there is significant concern that our ranking, by whatever measure, in the global information economy is less than it should be. While the overall number of United States households adopting broadband is growing, our relative position in the world is worsening. Consumers in other countries enjoy broadband connections that are faster, cheaper and offered by more providers.

Apropos to my previous post

we must examine whether the current measure of broadband speed in this country is adequate. In 1996, Congress directed the Federal Communications Commission to encourage the timely deployment to all Americans of capability enabling users “to originate and receive high-quality voice, data, graphics, and video telecommunications.” Curiously, the FCC continues to rely on the high-speed definition it set in 1999 as just 200 kilobits per second (kbps) in only one direction.

There is universal agreement that this is insufficient for cutting edge applications such as streaming video (1 mbps), medical monitoring (2.5 mbps) or videoconferencing (6 mbps). One need only ask any child playing educational games online whether our current broadband standard is too slow.

Next, we must consider how effectively we measure the level of broadband penetration in this country. Frankly, the FCC’s current zip-code method of measuring broadband is neither useful nor accurate. A realistic assessment that maps actual deployment and adoption will better enable policymakers to identify gaps in availability, price, and speed.

His solutions:

Encourage infrastructure investment: Telephone and cable companies are actively upgrading their existing infrastructure, but even services like DSL have limits presented by old legacy networks.

Promote competition: We should promote deployment and demand at the local level by any entity using any technology, including municipalities.

Manage spectrum wisely: Greater spectrum demands require us to continue to find ways to increase access and efficiency while protecting existing licensees.

Modernize universal service: We must carefully probe the stewardship of the nation’s universal service policies and consider supporting broadband service, especially in rural areas.

Foster innovation: The power of the Internet as an entrepreneurial medium for individuals and businesses, however small, must be preserved. Consumers should continue to go where they want, when they want, over the high-speed connections of their choice.

Protect consumers: Above all, we must remember that communications networks run over public resources such as spectrum or a community’s local rights of way. Our policies should demand that service providers adhere to appropriate social responsibilities that serve the common good such as public safety, law enforcement, privacy, and universal access.

Technorati Tags: Broadband, FCC, John Dingle, Spectrum

Got Broadband?

The change over in the US Congress and Ohio Governorship are fueling already passionate interest in media reform. On Friday Feb 2nd that passion manifested at the One Ohio gathering at he State Library of Ohio. See my full post at the One Ohio Blog for a summary and more information on Governor Ted Srickland's Broadband Ohio proposal. The key issues are that in Ohio:

• communities struggling to keep and attract businesses because they are unable to offer simple broadband connection;


• farmers, a significant economic sector in Ohio, unable to monitor agricultural markets;


• citizens, both urban and rural, unable to use a computer to do things connected citizens take for granted such take online classes, search and apply for jobs, access political, consumer and cultural information.

Not that this reality needs corroboration, but it was by a recent FCC report on national broadband penetration. Ohio ranks a mediocre 28th out of 50 states with about 1.4 million households connected.

While this may tell a discouraging story, it is not the full story. Recently, the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) filed a little reported lawsuit against the FCC to force it to release data from the Form 477 filings that telecom companies provide detailing where their service lines are deployed. The CPI requested the data under FOIA in late August. When the agency did not respond, the CPI filed suit.

The CPI wants to take a close look at how the FCC comes up with its broadband data. As I learned doing a local broadband survey with the Center for American Progress in 2005-6, a telco is given credit for serving a community even if there is only one connection within that zip code. So are there really 1.4 million households connected in Ohio?

According to CPI's statement:

Knowing the identities of the companies would also allow the public to better gauge the reliability of the FCC's own database. In a report released in May 2006, the Government Accountability Office discussed "information [received from the FCC] on the companies providing broadband service in ZIP codes throughout the United States." The GAO's analysis of Form 477 data allowed it to conclude that the median number of broadband providers within a ZIP code was two, rather than eight, as the FCC's analysis of the data found.

Additionally, the FCC sets a very low standard for broadband: 200kbps. With bandwidth ceiling this low it is near impossible to access many media files. And while you may have purchased a plan promising a fast connection you are unlikely ever to receive that top speed. Why? Because that bandwidth capacity was sold to you and 49 of your neighbors. If the majority of you are surfing YouTube your speed will drop precipitously.

Want to know your connection speed? Try this tool from Speakeasy:


Speakeasy measures both download and upload capacity. Upload capacity is vitally important if we are to use our computers as communications devices and not just as interactive televisions.

Other testing sites include Bandwidth Place and Windows User Group Network which has a nice graphical interface that measures upload and download speed.

Are you getting what you a paid for? Tell your story in the comments.

Technorati Tags: Broadband, Media Reform, FCC, Ohio, Ted Strickland, Center for Public Integrity, One Ohio