If state legislatures and governors follow through on those requests, they will not be compliant with federal rules on fiber. This shows why the federal prioritization of delivering fiber to everyone in the United States is the right call.īut various wireless players that are unable to deliver future-proof access are still actively asking state legislatures to grant them sizable portions of the federal subsidies-just because they think it is their right. Technical, objective, comparable analysis conducted by EFF concluded that fiber optics is the core ingredient for all 21 st century broadband access. This is why the Biden Administration’s emphasis on future-proofing the investments with scalability requirements is a critical change in policy.
But, after decades of internet growth that's seen average user consumption grow by 21% each year, we now know some broadband technologies have speed caps that eventually make them obsolete. This made more sense in the distant past, when various transmission mediums basically delivered similar outcomes in broadband access speeds and capabilities.
SKIRT STEAM CODE
Much of the policy-making in telecom subsidies has emphasized “technology neutrality,” which is code for saying every broadband provider should get subsidies by right. Wireless Lobby Push on States to Deprioritize Fiber Risks Federal Dollars But states relying on federal dollars alone will be forced to deliver less than states that are matching the federal investment with their own local dollars. Under that law, projects must be scalable, able to facilitate 5G and beyond, able to evolve with community needs, and build fiber-based infrastructure with limited exceptions for “extremely high-cost areas.” Arguably, options such as fixed wireless and satellite broadband could be considered for extremely high-cost areas-which unfortunately are not future-proofed like fiber. The NTIA program also directs states to follow the statutory text of the IIJA. Specifically, “recipients are encouraged to prioritize investments in fiber-optic infrastructure where feasible” to emphasize that projects should consider fiber first. While there is an exception for lower speeds, there is a general expectation that these projects can scale higher for future needs. Under the Treasury rules that govern rescue dollars, the “presumptively eligible projects” for broadband infrastructure must reliably deliver 100/100 mbps connectivity.
Federal Rescue Money and BEAD Grant Rules on Fiberīoth the Treasury Department's Capital Projects Fund and the National Telecommunications Information Administration's (NTIA) Broadband Equity Affordability and Deployment grant programs provide clear guidance to prioritize fiber-based infrastructure. But, despite this clear federal guidance, debates continue to rage in state legislatures and implementing bodies as entities unable to deliver future-proof access hope to get a cut of federal subsidy dollars. Past federal subsidy efforts in broadband failed to take long-term needs into account, which is how billions from past investments have gone to waste.
This is arguably one of the best changes in federal policy for broadband subsidies ever. The Biden administration has consistently made clear that states are to build future-proof infrastructure to deliver broadband that will be useful for communities for decades. Across the country, states are designing broadband plans to begin spending billions of federal dollars made available by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and past COVID-19 rescue dollar investment programs.
0 kommentar(er)
