FCC orders studies, then relies on Telco data after all

One prediction I’ve made that I hoped would be wrong is that of expecting broadband “stimulus” money to end up in the hands of the telcos who wouldn’t build much at  all with it. That prediction is based purely on how broadband funding has been spent in the past. The problem is two fold. Congress writes all sorts of gimmes into funding to begin with. Then, the allocated funds move to the FCC and USDA. The management of those agencies is largely composed of former and future revolving door insiders and lobbyists. The emphasis at Congress and these agencies is on distributing money, not on measuring results.

The FCC’s own deadline for acceptance of applications for broadband stimulus applications has arrived.  While a ton of money is being spent on studies, none will be complete before the balance of the money is spent. The FCC will continue to rely on Telco data to decide how stimulus money will be allocated.

…..the government has decided to back off from its demands for quality data about current broadband access and speeds from a third party and instead rely on the telecommunications industry’s information. On Friday, the Department of Commerce, which is running the National Telecommunications Information Agency, declared that the broadband maps only needs to contain block-level data, not the address-level data for which consumers groups had hoped. And it said the maps don’t need to contain information about the actual speeds offered because the large telcos view such information as competitive and wouldn’t give it up. I told you so.

So all the broadband maps will contain is general data about who has broadband (remember, that’s 768 kbps downlink speeds) on any given block — specifically what speeds are advertised, not what’s actually delivered. That difference could be significant for the telcos, whose DSL lines provide service to 25 percent of the U.S. (according to Leichtman Research Group) and whose speeds vary depending on how far a resident lives from the remote terminal. It’s less significant for the cable companies, which provide a shared network where speeds can vary depending on what a neighbor is doing on his or her connection, mostly because the cable company would be unlikely to see its network speeds dip below 768 kbps. For a nice analysis of why carriers can’t guarantee speeds, check out this post.

(Gigaom)

The dirty little secret about broadband for underprivileged and rural areas is that they have both been continuously funded and subsidized for more than a decade. The money has gone to incumbent providers with little or no accountability. The only thing that has changed with our new president is that amount on money we’re throwing down the telco rabbit hole.

Here’s another prediction:  When the studies underway are completed, a crisis will be declared and we’ll hear an outcry for more big spending with new taxes to support it. So much for change to believe in.