Broadband

Once upon a time, opinions on telecommunications policy, while divisive, did not generally split along political party lines. That has been steadily changing, as best exemplified by the FCC’s Open Internet Order. But as one analyst recently observed, “we would all be well served to engage these questions [of net neutrality and Title II reclassification] as questions of economics rather than morality plays about good and evil.” So what do the economics imply about these issues and why do policymakers draw different conclusions from economic analysis? Will Congress be satisfied to wait until the courts render their verdicts on the Order, or is there a sense that Congress no longer believes the agency reflects its general preferences and therefore will force changes? Participants in the panel “Congress and the FCC after Title II” will discuss these and other issues at the 2015 TPI Aspen Forum.

The Universal Service Fund, originally intended to subsidize voice communications for rural and low-income consumers, is steadily transitioning to focus on broadband. In 2011, the High-Cost Fund became the “Connect America” Fund and began to subsidize rural broadband. This year, the White House announced the “ConnectED” program, which increased funding to the Schools and Libraries E-Rate program. And the FCC is currently considering how the Lifeline program can subsidize broadband, rather than voice, connections for low-income people and whether to make subsidies available to even more rural providers.