February 2009

Opinion Could Dampen Zeal To Classify Government Information

If it is ultimately upheld, a memorandum opinion written by a federal judge in Virginia and released last week may limit the overclassification of information on national security grounds and prevent future prosecutions for leaking such information. The opinion could also spell the end to a four-year effort by the Justice Department to convict two former pro-Israeli lobbyists for allegedly violating the Espionage Act by passing classified government information to journalists and an Israeli Embassy official. U.S. District Judge Thomas S. Ellis III wrote the Feb. 17 opinion in a case, brought originally in 2005, that involves Stephen J. Rosen and Keith Weissman, both of whom at the time were working for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Their jobs were to lobby U.S. executive and legislative branch officials who had policymaking responsibilities in areas of AIPAC's interest.

Anchors Oblige Public's Craving for Tweets

Twitter, which began in 2006, has 6 million users, a fivefold increase since last summer. The 140-character limit on each message initially seems silly, but forces a witty sort of brevity that seems well matched to today's sound-bite culture. While dwarfed by the likes of Facebook, which has become so mainstream it can hardly be viewed as edgy, the bare-bones Twitter has been generating considerable buzz lately. In an age when people expect behind-the-scenes dish, the site enables television types to explain what they're doing -- and flatter their fans by soliciting their opinions.

States put spending details online

A growing number of states are putting everything from budgets and contracts to travel expenses online for the public to scrutinize. Twelve states post all their state spending, six post the checkbooks of selected departments, and seven have passed laws ordering the creation of online spending websites, according to Sandra Fabry, executive director of the Center for Fiscal Accountability. The most recent to go online were Kentucky, Georgia and Maryland, which launched in January. An additional 15 are considering legislation, she says. "Taxpayers who fund every expenditure by government have the right to know how their tax dollars are being spent," Fabry says.

Why the census is always political

With the 2010 census a year away and the Obama administration still taking shape, the survey has emerged as a partisan political football. But politicians, demographers and other census observers know that this year's dustup over the census is only the latest chapter in a long history. "It has been a political process since the first decision on how to count slaves. It goes back to 1790," said Roberto Suro, a University of Southern California communications professor and long-time census watcher. The nation's first census, he noted, considered a slave as just three-fifths of a person for the decennial head count. The primary purpose of the census is to count every person living in the United States in order to draw the boundaries of congressional districts and ensure an approximately equal population in each. States and localities also use the data to determine political districts. And the federal government allocates funds for highways, schools, police and other purposes based on the population count. "What's not political about the census? It's the basis of the two most important things in politics: money and representation," said Harvard professor of government D. Sunshine Hillygus. "Mayors and governors are keenly aware of this. They know that getting an accurate count of their cities is going to directly translate into dollars. "They also know that whether they get an additional congressman or one less congressman will depend on getting an accurate count."

Skepticism arises over rural broadband stimulus

The stimulus bill provides $7.2 billion for grants, loans and loan guarantees, primarily for areas that lack broadband or are "underserved," though the term is not defined. Some of that money is set aside to expand Internet access at public centers like community colleges and public libraries. But one reason the money may not have much impact is its small size: less than 1 percent of the overall stimulus package, and substantially less per citizen than some countries, like Ireland and Sweden, have spent on improving their networks. The Obama administration is looking at creating a more comprehensive plan to get the whole country covered by broadband, technology adviser Alec Ross told The Washington Post this week, but it's not yet clear if that would mean more subsidies. A possible point of comparison is phone service for rural areas, which has long been subsidized through a program that has critics, too. A study by Robert Crandall of the Brookings Institution said that the program produces customer savings of about $2 per month for $20 in monthly subsidies. But he conceded that when phone service was being built out, subsidies may have helped. Raul Katz, a Columbia Business School professor, estimates that the broadband plan will create 128,000 jobs over four years, because it will put installers and equipment makers to work, and those people will then spend the money they make. He's much less certain how many jobs the Internet access itself will create. It could be as many as 273,000 or closer to zero.

Lack Of National Broadband Strategy Costs Industry Billions in Stimulus

Discussing the broadband provisions of the stimulus law, Blair Levin, a member of President Obama's tech policy transition team, said that because we didn't have a national broadband policy in place the stimulus package couldn't include as much money for broadband as it may have otherwise. Blair's comment alludes to the fact that with a clear, coherent, comprehensive national broadband strategy in place and everyone supporting it, that our elected officials are ready, wiling, and able to pursue transformative action in spurring the deployment and use of broadband. Blair set out his hopes for how these dollars will be spent, simply stating that he'd like to see the money spent quickly, tracked accurately (which is no small feat for government or for a program of this size), and that we learn something from this process that we can apply to future decisions.

How Will the $7.2 Billion Allotted for Broadband Stimulus Be Spent?

In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, recently enacted by Congress, many details regarding the allocation of funds for high-tech projects remain blurry. Nevertheless, the nation's tech community appears to be encouraged by the $7.2 billion provision for broadband. The bureaucracy to allocate the money has not been set up yet, and no one can be absolutely sure exactly how the broadband program will work. Once the National Telecommunications & Information Administration and the Department of Agriculture create a system for distributing stimulus grants, they will work with the various states to outline the states' needs. Industry watchers say that the new law is crucial if some 20 million Americans are to obtain the broadband Internet access they need. In coming weeks, the person appointed as Secretary of Commerce by President Obama will appoint an assistant secretary--and that person will bear primary responsibility for overseeing execution of the broadband provisions.

ConnectedNation model has pitfalls

In 2004, Kentucky set out to build a statewide broadband network. In conjunction with ConnectKentucky, a nonprofit organization that leverages partnerships between state government and broadband providers, the state has significantly increased broadband availability, spending about $7.5 million on the project. ConnectKentucky claims that 95 percent of all Kentuckians—546,000 new households—now have high-speed Internet access, up from 60 percent. The organization points to a detailed map of broadband availability showing cable, DSL, wireless and satellite services down to the census-block level as evidence. The map is compiled from 88 different service providers, according to Brian Mefford, former head of ConnectKentucky and now chairman and CEO of ConnectedNation, a national offshoot based in Washington, D.C. But the organization keeps details about providers as a proprietary and closely held secret. This has set off alarms for some industry experts, who question whether entities such as ConnectedNation are acting as shills for preferred partners and carriers.

Art Brodsky, communications director for Public Knowledge, an advocacy group in Washington, D.C., focused on the emerging digital culture, questions ConnectKentucky's assertion of nearly 100 percent broadband penetration. "Carriers should be required to submit the data that the states want, not have it be tucked away in some black hole," Brodsky said. "The map isn't transparent. There's no information about competing carriers and their rates. The data just cannot be verified." Brodsky's proposed alternative is to have the states, not a third party such as ConnectedNation, manage a more ambitious broadband rollout. But this may prove difficult. Faced with a pile of money that must be spent in a short amount of time, states already are turning to ConnectedNation for help in replicating its model.

A blind curve on the info highway?

[Commentary] The federal stimulus package includes more than $4 billion for rural broadband access. That's great news. Plenty of rural communities in North Carolina still don't have access to broadband. Their residents, businesses and prospects are stuck in the age of dial-up. Upgrading those connections is an urgent public need. Yet we're poised to decide where to spend those precious dollars for rural broadband based on maps we let telecommunications companies draw - at public expense. That's nuts. The problem is, there is no precise grid in North Carolina (and most states) showing the areas broadband is and is not available. A bigger problem: The cable and telephone companies are tight-fisted with specifics about the level and location of service. They are not regulated as public utilities in North Carolina, so nothing says they have to release that data. And when they do, there's no way to check its accuracy. A bigger problem still: The stimulus package includes $340 million for nationwide broadband mapping. But there's a move to put the mapping for where service is needed in the hands of Connected Nation, a company representing big telecommunications companies. We're going to spend millions in public stimulus money on a hard-to-address public need based on information gathered by secretive companies who are protecting their proprietary interests? And, by the way, companies who stand to gain from these new connections? Broadband is the gold standard in education, medicine and economic development. It's the equivalent of a 16-lane interstate in a global economy. North Carolina has a shot at a few dollars to put some of its most underserved communities on that powerful highway. But will that money be wasted because we use biased information to decide where?

The Bridge to Smart Technology

Over the next five years the U.S. is poised to spend more than $500 billion on infrastructure, more than the amount spent to build the entire Interstate Highway System in today's dollars. The money will come from President Barack Obama's stimulus package and a separate transportation bill that Congress is expected to approve in September. The avalanche of cash comes just as a host of so-called smart technologies is emerging to make it possible to build roads, bridges, mass transit systems, schools, hospitals, and electric grids faster and better, and to operate them more efficiently. There are tensions over how smart to make the country's infrastructure, though. On one side, tech leaders portray this as an unprecedented opportunity for the US to catch up with countries in Asia and the Middle East that have spent billions on futuristic cities and other projects in recent years. "Smarter infrastructure is by far our best path to creating these new, globally competitive jobs and stimulating growth," said IBM (IBM) Chief Executive Samuel J. Palmisano in January, after meeting with Obama to discuss the stimulus package. On the other side of the debate are traditional construction trade groups and many politicians. They argue that the emphasis in government spending should be on creating as many jobs as quickly as possible, so old-fashioned brick-and-mortar projects make the most sense.