PANELISTS LOOK AT SUPPLY VS. DEMAND ASPECTS OF BROADBAND DEBATE
Broadband deployment isn’t simple supply vs. demand issue as some policy debate has indicated, but will depend on growth in both areas, panelists said Wed. in audio conference sponsored by Warren Communications News, parent of Communications Daily. “There are issues on both sides,” said Floyd Kvamme, member of President’s Council of Advisers on Science & Technology (PCAST). Two issues are “interlinked, and understanding the linkage is important,” he said. It’s hard to divorce one from another, added TIA Pres. Matthew Flanigan. “Both supply and demand” are needed, said ex-FCC Comr. Susan Ness, also on the panel. Washington policy advocates have tended to stress one over other. Supply advocates such as Flanigan have been working for regulatory changes to encourage development of transmission facilities while others, such as PCAST, are concentrating on applications to stimulate demand.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Asked why White House had tasked PCAST to look at demand issues if both were considered important, Kvamme said “it’s clear that’s where the data is harder to gather.” Supply issues are easy to track, just by looking at number of subscribers, said Kvamme, partner at Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers. It’s harder to determine how well content is being developed to meet consumer needs, he said. “We're looking at what the role of government ought to be, are there things we can do to help people who want broadband,” he said.
Kvamme said President had asked PCAST to look at 4 areas where technology had bearing on national issues. Broadband demand was one of them, along with technology aspects of terrorism, technology transfer and energy efficiency. Panel, which is just starting and is in “information-gathering phase,” has members from corporations, academia and foundations, he said. Flanigan, on other hand, said he was more concerned about lack of transmission supply, which he feared could stymie broadband deployment. “The technology industry is not recovering,” he said. “It’s in a downturn and we believe broadband deployment is critical to the recovery of the technology industry” that constitutes TIA’s membership, Flanigan said. “Last mile infrastructure needs upgrading” and best way to do that is for FCC to ease regulations that require Bell companies to unbundle their broadband infrastructure, he said. Technology companies tend to agree with Bells that these unbundling, or sharing, requirements are making it hard to invest in new facilities. “As the demand side grows, we believe the government has a role to assure the supply can meet the demand,” Flanigan said.
Ness said she agreed that generally there should be “as little government intrusion as possible.” However, she said, she also thinks “the only thing worse than a monopoly is an unregulated monopoly,” which she said made it difficult for her to subscribe to Bell deregulation movement. “In the aggregate” there’s no supply problem because about 80% of country has access to broadband facilities, either cable modem, DSL or satellite, Ness said. However, there are areas where there are no broadband services available and, while she doesn’t agree with wholesale government intervention, she could support efforts by regulators or legislators to improve service to those areas. “We don’t need to extinguish a candle with a fire truck” by deregulating entire industry when problem involves small percent of subscribers and geographic locations, Ness said. Asked what she would advise Congress to do, Ness highlighted tax credits, adding that pilot projects in underserved areas also are important, which don’t even require legislation