Monday, November 14, 2011

Where Should the Money Go?

No matter what side of the argument you’re on, the FCC’s decision to redirect funds to subsidize rural broadband access was a step in the right direction. The status quo was no longer working. But a new complaint has now entered the discussion.

Civil rights groups are upset because they feel that some of the money that has been earmarked for the new rural broadband fund should be going to the Lifeline program. Lifeline is a $1.2 billion program that offers low-income citizens credits to help pay for their phone bills. These groups feel that the money to help the poor would, in total, benefit more people than those with broadband needs in rural areas.

It’s an interesting argument. Some statistics indicate that there are a lot more people currently with the wiring necessary to get broadband who just can’t afford it, than those without access at all. But even if they had the money, would they subscribe?

The debate then boils down to what segment of people is in a worse situation. People with low education, low income, and high poverty live in both rural and urban environments. How should the government best spend its money?

Obviously, this is just speculation. The funds have already been approved for rural broadband extension, so the argument is, essentially, too little, too late. But dismissing the complaints of the civil rights groups without full consideration of merit would be flippant. Without politics getting in the way, figuring out which group of people is truly more in need would be a fascinating study.

What do you think?

Labels: Economy, FCC, Rural Broadband