USTelecom Urges Support for E-911 Bill June 13th, 2008

Last week, USTelecom President and CEO Walter B. McCormick Jr. sent a letter urging passage of the Senate/House agreed version of H.R. 3403—the New and Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act of 2008—to the House and Senate Leadership, the Chairs and Ranking Members of the relevant committees and subcommittees, and to the sponsoring Members. In the letter, Walter noted that “USTelecom members have been proud to assist IP-enabled voice service providers in their efforts to comply with existing 911 requirements, helping them attain nearly 100 percent coverage with 911 and Enhanced 911 (E-911) services” and expressed support for the legislation, which, in his words, “recognizes the need for a national IP enabled emergency network that can accommodate emerging network architectures, platforms, and devices and coordinate the sharing of information among a variety of response entities.”

House Oversight Committee Signals Interest in Universal Service June 11th, 2008

Monday, Rep. Henry Waxman (D – Calif.) sent a letter in his capacity as Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin. The letter requested information related to the Universal Service Fund, specifically information about USF disbursements to telecommunications providers under the high-cost support program.

Although there is currently no formal committee investigation on universal service, Chairman Waxman’s letter indicates an interest in the issue on the committee’s part. USTelecom will be sure to keep you up to date about developments on universal service, both in Congress and at the FCC.

Muni Wi-Fi Bill Would Chill Private Investment February 27th, 2008

Yesterday, USTelecom’s Walter McCormick, along with the heads of several other associations, sent a letter to the leadership of the House Telecom & Internet Subcommittee about Chairman Markey’s (D - Mass.) “Wireless Consumer Protection and Community Broadband Empowerment Act of 2008” (PDF). Title II of the bill, “Community Broadband Empowerment,” would keep states and localities from passing laws preventing broadband service provision by public entities, including municipalities.

In opposing that provision, the letter states:

[F]ederal municipal broadband legislation would chill private investment in existing and future broadband networks. This ultimately leads to less, not more, broadband deployment as the investment risk for private entities is unnecessarily increased and private capital is displaced with public funds, needlessly burdening taxpayers. Additionally, federal municipal broadband legislation encourages cherry picking the easier to serve areas within town limits, diminishing the feasibility of broadband service in the more costly to serve outlying areas.

As the letter points out, municipal broadband projects around the country—San Francisco, Houston, New Orleans, Chicago, Philadelphia—are being abandoned, privatized, or substantially scaled back; that’s an expensive lesson for a municipality to learn. The letter also notes that 14 states already regulate the ability of municipalities to provide broadband with public funds.

The goal of wider availability of broadband is certainly a good one, but recent history has shown that municipal broadband projects just might not be the best way to go, especially as networking technologies continue to evolve. Congress should continue to work with broadband providers to improve deployment and availability through things like the RUS broadband loan program and public-private partnerships such as ConnectKentucky.