Will the US fall behind in the global broadband race?

[Commentary] To many, if not most, Americans, the phrase “regulatory humility” sounds like an oxymoron. Yet, for the last two decades, this has been the almost uniquely American approach to telecommunications and technology policy. Adopting a posture of regulatory humility did not mean that government had no role — it still pressed for universal service, an open and secure Internet, protection of intellectual property and improved use and management of spectrum needed for existing and emerging wireless technologies. The administration recognized, however, that its job was to “steer, not row,” as the late Commerce Secretary Ron Brown put it. Title II regulation could stifle investment and deter innovation.

There are options to preserve an open Internet and to spur growth and competition that are less archaic and destructive. Creating regulatory uncertainty as we seek investment in more capacious broadband networks makes little sense. We have witnessed what happened in Australia over the past decade when government and politics became too involved in the development of a nation’s infrastructure, and we are watching Europe move to reform outdated, Title II-like regulation to accelerate sluggish investment in its broadband networks. The United States, on the other hand, has led the world in Internet innovation over the last 20 years, helping to spur investment with its deliberately chosen regulatory model. Now is not the time to reverse course. With more and more users and endless possibilities for innovation thanks to high-speed IP networks, investment is needed now, more than ever. “Regulatory humility” and “first do no harm” — these sound like the right recipe for the next 20 years of broadband growth.

[Larry Irving is a founding co-chairman of the D.C.-based Internet Innovation Alliance]