As of this week, we’re “in a race to the finish line” in the latest chapter of the debate over the right regulatory regime to govern the provision of broadband, or what’s often referred to as “net neutrality.” As we approach the latest FCC vote on these issues, I wanted to offer a few thoughts on why getting this right is so important for rural consumers and the small broadband providers that are focused on serving them. I also want to discuss why a miss will have longstanding implications despite the increased focus on bringing connectivity to rural America.
First, while our members - NTCA's community-based broadband providers - offer critical connections to the world for rural consumers through their broadband networks and services, they are not the only players in the online ecosystem. Whether it’s interacting with a website or accessing essential services, our members are just one piece of a bigger puzzle. Middle mile networks, transit and peering networks, internet backbones, content distribution networks and edge providers all play just as big a role as last-mile internet service providers (ISPs) in ensuring that consumers get the information and content they want and access to the services they need. In fact, these other entities are often much bigger and have much greater market power than the small rural broadband providers that make up NTCA’s membership. Meanwhile, NTCA members live in the communities they serve – their customers are neighbors, friends and family, so they have every incentive to deliver services that respond fully to customer needs. This is why NTCA has consistently advocated for a light-touch regulatory backstop that ensures interconnection and the seamless exchange of data and content across all networks and platforms, rather than the adoption of heavy-handed rules that apply only to last-mile ISPs alone. We hope to have more conversations in the coming weeks with the FCC on what it will really take to ensure an “open internet” across the entire internet. After all, shouldn't that be the ultimate policy goal here?
Second, it appears that the draft order would essentially cut off further consideration by the FCC of how to ensure essential universal service programs are on sounder financial footing, at least for now. Everyone always talks about how important the FCC’s Universal Service Fund (USF) programs are for sustaining networks built in high-cost areas and keeping services to consumers affordable, and everyone always talks about how the contribution mechanism that funds them is outdated and in need of repair. There’s also serious concern that the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) is running out of funding, which is a “canary in the coal mine” when it comes to funding a USF-style program through the uncertainties of appropriations cycles. As it would reclassify broadband, this order could be a springboard for meaningful discussion about how we fund the programs that everyone says are so important for promoting broadband availability and affordability.
Unfortunately, the draft order sidesteps this opportunity. Rather than advancing further consideration of whether and how to implement such changes, it would largely end this debate for now at the FCC and hope instead that Congress might ride to the rescue. This could happen, and we know there are many thoughtful leaders in Congress considering such issues. But now such help might be needed more than ever. There’s hardly a guarantee that will happen though, particularly with the challenge that is moving anything through Congress now, and the FCC is obviously a key forum for a debate over much-needed solutions. The FCC has long been the USF subject matter expert and, while other agencies are increasingly playing large roles in promoting broadband deployment, the FCC still has an essential leadership role to play when it comes to the broader mission of universal service. It’s important not to abdicate that.
We are appreciative of the engagement by the FCC commissioners and their staff throughout this process, and we know there are many hard decisions to be made in this proceeding. On the two issues above, however, we think the path is pretty clear when it comes to promoting an open internet and preserving and advancing universal service – and we look forward to talking further with the FCC in the next few weeks on these critical issues.