Information Technology & Innovation Foundation

Municipal broadband is unlikely to scale well to fit U.S. broadband needs. Broadband requires constant investment and innovation; it is not a type of infrastructure that remains future-proof without continued development. It also benefits from economies of scale. So if the goal is to get as many Americans online as possible, policy should prioritize efficient spending and allow for an environment where those most optimized to succeed can compete without unnecessary barriers. In a few instances, that may in fact be municipal broadband.

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.

Any national infrastructure package should include 21st century digital infrastructure—not only investments in core digital infrastructure, such as broadband and government IT systems, but also hybrid-digital upgrades to existing physical infrastructure to improve its performance. There is an array of areas any infrastructure bill should target to ensure digital infrastructure deployment.

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.