Alexandra Bruer

Open Radio Access Networks (Open RANs) would define open standards and interfaces between components of wireless RANs, providing a unique opportunity to diversify the supply chain by separating today’s integrated, single-provider RAN systems into modular parts. This report by the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation provides the history of Open RAN, the technology's benefits and challenges, and recommendations for policymakers. The key takeaways are:

Calls for symmetrical broadband speeds (the same speeds for uploads as downloads) have circulated in telecom policy circles for over a decade. Early support for broadband symmetry was largely ideological in nature, based on the belief that individuals could play a bigger role in generating content, and symmetry was necessary to put production on equal footing with consumption of content. Recent efforts to promote symmetrical networks, however, appear aimed at shaping a potential infrastructure subsidy program.

Despite years of effort and tens of billions of dollars in subsidies, the United States still faces a stubborn rural-urban broadband gap. A large, one-time injection of federal capital can succeed in bridging the rural broadband divide if it is reasonably targeted and allocated through a reverse-auction program that serves as a transition away from the Federal Communications Commission’s Universal Service Fund. The current FCC program is funded through regressive fees levied on a shrinking base of telecommunications services.

Broadband affordability is a problem for some Americans, but not the “crisis” advocates claim. Municipal broadband prices are not substantially different from private ISPs’ broadband prices. After accounting for associated costs, private entry-level broadband plans are comparable to, if not more affordable than, municipal broadband. US entry-level broadband rates are also comparable with prices in peer nations. Studies focused on advertised prices often fail to account for average income.

The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation supports quick disbursement of this critical relief—the Federal Communications Commission should focus first and foremost on quickly getting money out the door. However, it should also consider how the emergency broadband benefit program can serve as a bridge to a better, more rational subsidy program than the current Lifeline system. The Commission ideally could provide a voucher that gives flexibility and choice to eligible participants.

5G is expected to provide the connective tissue for many emerging technologies critical to productivity, innovation, and national competitiveness. Some commentators have panicked over the so-called “race” for 5G, pointing in fear at China’s hundreds of thousands of new base stations, and projections of hundreds of millions of 5G subscribers this year alone. But if we are going to base policy decisions on this race (and it is questionable that we should), understanding how infrastructure and subscription numbers are actually counted matters.

For years, policymakers have asked a series of questions related to broadband speed: How fast is fast enough? What is an appropriate target for rural networks built with government subsidies? Is current competition sufficient to see the speeds we need?