FCC approves $137 million in funding for rural broadband connectivity

[Polycount]

In context: The current FCC has proven to be a bit controversial since Chairman Ajit Pai took over -- the infamous anti-net neutrality vote is still discussed to this day -- but it's not as if the organization hasn't tried to do good for consumers. On the contrary; Pai and his fellow Commissioners have been pushing to connect rural Americans with broadband internet for quite some time.

Today, the FCC approved $121 million in funding to boost the rollout of rural broadband connectivity. In theory, this funding should bring serviceable internet speeds to roughly 36,579 homes and business across 16 US states.

This expansion won't happen overnight, though. In fact, the timeline for this project is fairly long: the funding will be handed out over the next decade.

According to the FCC, this is the "fourth wave" of funding that has been authorized on the back of the Connect America Fund Phase II auction. Internet providers could begin to receive early portions of this cash as soon as this month.

The FCC says it has already authorized over $924 million in funding for broadband connectivity. In total, the organization plans to approve $1.488 billion, which could connect a dizzying 700,000 unserved or underserved rural homes and small businesses.

If you're wondering where the rest of the $137 million is going (we've only mentioned $121 million so far), Engadget reports that the FCC "separately greenlit" an additional $16 million for the purpose of bringing high-speed internet to about 8,000 rural New York-based businesses and homes.

Only time will tell whether or not the FCC and American ISPs can deliver on these lofty promises and goals.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/81404-fcc-approves-137-million-funding-rural-broadband-connectivity.html

 

[VitalyT]

Now you can chip and track online every cow in the country.

P.S. Is Internet trying to convince us that this guy's name is FCC?

 

[Polycount]

Now you can chip and track online every cow in the country.

P.S. Is Internet trying to convince us that this guy's name is FCC?

Wait, you mean his name ISN'T FCC?

Crap.

 

[ZackL04]

Is that even close to enough money to provide web access to these rural people?

 

[ThrakazogZ]

Wait a second. I thought repealing net neutrality was going to spur growth, and allow ISP's to bring internet to rural areas. No wait....I'm pretty sure allowing them to buy out competitors was going to allow them to bring high speed internet to everyone. No....no....hang on.......I'm pretty sure giving the ISP's huge tax breaks would allow them to fund high speed internet infrastructure to rural areas..........wait....wait.......it was blocking cities and towns from providing low cost high speed internet that was going to finally allow ISP's to bring high speed internet to rural areas.....no....wait...............

 

[wiyosaya]

I hope they plan on keeping tabs on the money to ensure that it is actually spent on bringing broadband service to rural America and not just for the bonuses of the ISP execs and kickbacks to Pai.

 

[wiyosaya]

Now you can chip and track online every cow in the country.

I'll be looking forward to it. It will be the best thing to hit fakebook ever!

 

[lumbeeman]

Is that even close to enough money to provide web access to these rural people?

Not even close, I worked for one of the major cable companies for over 15 years and it is a drop in the bucket, a very small drop. They say boost but it is not much of one at all.

 

[GeforcerFX]

137 million for 37,000 homes seems pretty doable, the ISP's still have to invest some of there own but it makes the line laying less painful and ROI should be a lot faster. This should be some pretty isolated places in the midwest and northwest (which also explains the timeline) I saw a lot of the early money being used in my area, a lot of rural fiber was getting laid down in the last 5 years people going from 1-5mbps to 20mbps and having the options soon for 40mbps (they have some higher tier stuff to work out).

 

[RaXoR]

Well, this money will not make it anywhere near as far as they claim it will. Maybe a small portion will go towards expansion. Just enough to report back that there has been some progress made. However, the rest will definitely be pocketed. These companies already charge an arm and a leg for broadband service, they have more than enough funds to expand the infrastructure without the need for government aid.

 

[Black Paper]

Weren't they already paid to do this with the Telecommunications act of 1996?
They have already been paid to do this and failed to deliver.
I'm going to paraphrase/plagiarize Wendell from Level1Techs on this.

What has actually happened since its passing?


• As a result of mergers and lack of regional competition, the telecommunications industry has shed more than 500,000 jobs, and lost 2 trillion dollars in value.
• Cable television rates went up by 50% by 2003, and have since gone up by another 50%.
• http://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/index.ssf/2012/08/comcasts_annual_rate_hike_mode.html
• Numerous studies documented that provit-driven media conglomerates, permitted under this, are investing less in news and information
• There are a few cases of industries & executives agreeing to provisions & requirements in the act, then immediately going to court to block their implementation.
• Average citizens arguably became less involved because of increased bureacracy and less oversite requirements; from 1997-5, a small number of companies have spent more than $400 million on political contributions and lobbying in DC.
• Massive deregulation. The effect of that has arguably not been lower prices and more competition. If anything the opposite.
• The massive wave of media mergers means that a very small hand full of companies control almost all american media.
• The Internet is now shifting to be a major source of American media and (at present) is relatively free of this oligopoly.
• The More Recent Wave of Mergers has included "last mile" providers -- content creators with content delivery systems (e.g. AOL/Time Warner). One supposes these companies wish to control the internet the same way that telephone and television are controlled.
• "The goal here was to strike a balance between industry and the public interest, but no sooner had the law passed than special interests went to court to stifle provisions they did not like" - A former Clinton staffer.


How did it happen?

• Corporate Malfeasance -- this can be argued to be a large part of the Job Loss -- Qwest and MCI WorldCom. The "Baby Bells" refused to participate in a meaningful way to truly allow local competition such as allowing MCI to enter the local telephone market.
• Politicians campaigned to allow vastly increased media concentration.
• Mergers & conglomeration has manifest as single companies being responsible for all cable, telephone & internet services.
• SBC (Southwestern Bell) sued to prevent access to local infrastructure.
• "In other countries, when incumbent phone companies were forced to give lease access to their infrastructure (at a reasonable rate) it was small, local companies who brought innovation to their communities. High speed internet at low prices" a BusinessWeek article notes.

What is going on right now?

• Verizon & others are refusing to rebuild/replace infrastructure after disasters.
• Expect a "big lobby push" from incumbents to do away with the "obsolete" PSTN network (only obsolete because they didn't upgrade it for 20 years!!!!) etc.

Time has only proven that the FCC will continue to shovel more tax-payer money into the bottomless pit of the unaccountable, act-breaking American ISPs for "lofty promises and goals" that were promised to the American populous, whom has already footed the bill in 1996.

 

[Black Paper]

If the FCC truly wants to expand broadband connectivity for rural areas, they would allow local municipal competition, nullify One Touch Make Ready ordinances, and switch back to something similar to the 'Dial-up' model.
Not dump money to companies who will use that money to buy their competition.

 

[Nocturne]

Wait a second. I thought repealing net neutrality was going to spur growth, and allow ISP's to bring internet to rural areas. No wait....I'm pretty sure allowing them to buy out competitors was going to allow them to bring high speed internet to everyone. No....no....hang on.......I'm pretty sure giving the ISP's huge tax breaks would allow them to fund high speed internet infrastructure to rural areas..........wait....wait.......it was blocking cities and towns from providing low cost high speed internet that was going to finally allow ISP's to bring high speed internet to rural areas.....no....wait...............

I think you basically summed it up perfectly, ty. This will go into investors pockets while they prove they ran lines they were going to anyways while still ignoring the majority of rural areas, as it has in the past.

 

[DelJo63]

Is that even close to enough money to provide web access to these rural people?

$121,000,000usd / 36,579 = $3307.908 per connection

no real assurance whatsoever the bandwidth to be provided either!

IMO some lobbyist paid off the FCC

 

[Camikazi]

$137 million give out and I'm guessing the ISPs will just keep around $120 million of it for themselves. Without setting deadlines and actual fees (fees that they will feel) for not meeting them the ISPs will just do what they want and the money will be wasted.