More than 700,000 households in the United States and small businesses in uncoated rural America receive broadband internet connections as part of a recently completed auction under the supervision of the Federal Communications Commission. Broadband services to these unoccupied areas in 45 states - the equivalent of as many as 1.7 million Americans - will be subsidized for the next 10 years with about $ 1.5 billion of federal funds.
Improved
broadband services for rural broadband have been a focus of attention for FCC
chairman Ajit Pai since he was named President Donald Trump in January 2017.
Broadband access "will bring huge benefits to those communities," Pai
said.
Two
years ago, the FCC came up with the auction as a way to encourage providers to
deliver broadband to areas that did not have access to high-speed internet. The
agency set aside about $ 2 billion in the Connect America Fund, which comes
from the Universal Service Fund, which all consumers contribute to through
their telephone and internet accounts. A separate $ 170.4 million of that
amount is reserved for the broadband subsidy program of the state of New York.
"I
have always been impressed by the rural communities that have (broadband)
access and use it to strengthen the lives of the families living there and only
the general sense of optimism about the future," Pai, who comes from the
small Southeast. Kansas City Parsons, said in an interview.
Among
the states that receive the most investment obligations are Missouri ($ 255 million
over 10 years), California ($ 149 million) and Virginia ($ 109 million).
"We
really hope that in the coming years, with the distribution of these Connect
America Fund funds, rural communities that have lost people so far and do not
have that sense of optimism about the future can recover some of it."
More
than 220 companies participated in the bidding process, a "reverse
auction" where bidders who promised to provide the best service for the
lowest amount of FCC subsidies that served the region. Collective bids were
about $ 500 million lower than expected, so funding will be used for future
connectivity in rural areas, says Pai.
The
103 auction winners, announced on Tuesday, included many small telephone
companies and ISPs, as well as a big name: Verizon, which secured $ 9.5 million
of the $ 1.5 billion in expenses. More than half (53 per cent) of homes and
businesses covered by the auction receive download speeds of at least 100
megabits per second. All locations will achieve at least 25 Mbps, the FCC said
Tuesday.
Winning
providers must achieve performance targets, such as 40 percent of housing
coverage within the locations they offer within three years.
The
crucial role that broadband and mobile providers play in connecting communities
to work, education and in emergency situations has been examined by legislators
and regulators, especially when there is a gap in coverage. Verizon Wireless
apologized last week after it delayed or delayed the service of Santa Clara
Fire Department because it had exceeded the allocation of monthly data because
the California fire brigade used the phone to coordinate personnel and fire
trucks during the fight against the Mendocino Complex Fire this month.
The
FCC says that a lack of broadband in rural communities contributes to a
"digital divide" in America trying to close these investments. Extra
auctions are planned next year.
Pai,
who spent two years as a Verizon lawyer before returning to government work and
eventually joined the FCC under President Barack Obama, called falling
investment in rural and urban areas with low incomes as one of the reasons for
the rules of the era of the time to break in which Internet is preventing
service providers from blocking and restricting content. These so-called net
neutrality rules were based on the authority of the utility model on the basis
of Title II of the Communications Act of 1934 and the overloaded ISPs and
created a marketplace that led to fewer investments, he argued.
Net
neutrality supporters and democrats denied that the investment declines did not
happen and that withdrawal was really a way to remove consumer protection. A
study of the largest airlines, the basis for the claim of the FCC, showed that
investments fell in the two-year period in which the rules were in force. But
analysts say this was largely because AT & T, like other carriers, was
engaged in a competitive shift that probably played a role.