Template Tools
| Senator Shaheen "Federal regulators are wasting taxpayer dollars" |
| Tuesday, 04 May 2010 18:11 |
|
Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen is very reluctant to criticize the administration in a tough election year, but everyone in Congress is so discouraged by the results of the broadband stimulus she felt a need to speak out. As Congress Daily reports "A Democrat on the Senate Small Business Committee raised concerns on Tuesday that federal regulators are wasting taxpayer dollars by funding duplicate broadband infrastructure projects as part of the $7.2 billion broadband stimulus program."
Senator Shaheen went on to say "They have funded projects that are competing with providers that already are on the ground." That's not true everywhere, but there are so many examples of NTIA unneeded overbuilds that Larry Strickling was inaccurate saying "The idea of funding competitors though, that's not the business we're in." When Joe Biden went down to the North Georgia project and said "we're bringing broadband to an area that doesn't have any," he was speaking in a town where every home could get 6 megabits. A 45 megabit T-3 was just down the road, fast enough to transmit live 4 different HD camera angles of his speech.
Democrats joined the Republicans last September in demanding that RUS and NTIA refocus on using the money for what Congress intended: bring broadband to those without. Adelstein at RUS has since refocused "We very clearly distinguish between our program and the NTIA program .. We are very committed to going to the most unserved, remote parts of the country."
He gave an example: "Bretton Woods doesn't have any broadband today."
Strickling amazed me by giving the House Committee a big 'eff you, saying he would use the money for faster connections, especially to community colleges. Nothing wrong with doing that, but no one except Larry thinks that's a high priority in the worst financial crisis of our lifetimes. We all know what teenagers will do with faster connections and very rarely will they be watching Stanford or MIT lecturers. Faster "middle mile" to community colleges will facilitate one very common practice, but I don't see any reason to spend $billions for kids to download pron more quickly.
Boucher and Markey have backed off criticizing NTIA because of the election. I struggled with whether to do similar, because I'm a strong Obama supporter. Larry has been very gracious and people I respect believe he's one of the best. But I'm seeing $billions mostly wasted and NTIA is stonewalling not just me but Congress on how the money is being spent.
Representative Stearns expressed what I heard from Congressmen of both parties. "NTIA and the RUS should prioritize grants in unserved areas before underserved areas." Rep. Barton explained "there should be some prioritization for areas that are totally unserved as opposed to underserved because underserved is in the eyes of the beholder but unserved is unserved and there is no--you know, that is an either/or digital decision. They either have service or they don't." Rep. Walden agreed, "For the limited amount of government resource we have, it ought to go to those who don't have access to any service first."
NTIA three times has refused to answer my questions "how many of the unserved are you reaching" and "how many jobs are directly being created." I've now filed a Freedom of Information request but I'm not hopeful. If the facts ever become public, the waste will be obvious.
Unfortunately, the haste, I believe, with which the stimulus package was drafted and enacted and the very short time frame it gives the NTIA and RUS to implement the program creates sort of a risk in my mind that taxpayers' dollars will not be used effectively. Dispensing this sort of money, this amount of money entrusted to the NTIA and the RUS in a manner that is fair and efficient, that will be a significant challenge to both of you gentlemen. We are going to have to commit ourselves to vigorous oversight and so, Mr. Chairman, I recommend at a later time we do have further hearings to look into oversight, how much of this huge billions and billions of dollars that are going to be going out in a short amount of time, how it is being used to ensure that the NTIA and the RUS would prioritize grants and States that have completed broadband maps so that we know that the grants are well targeted. This can also help to ensure that requests are made and provide a valuable incentive to complete maps in the remaining States as thoroughly and quickly as possible. In fact, I believe that no money should be spent until mapping is complete and the FCC broadband plan is finished, which I think will be early next year. This national broadband plan will set forth goals and policies on how to best improve broadband access, so it just makes sense that we should know where to spend the money before it is actually spent, and why not have these studies complete first.
In addition, the NTIA and the RUS should prioritize grants in unserved areas before underserved areas. Barton
there should be some prioritization for areas that are totally unserved as opposed to underserved because underserved is in the eyes of the beholder but unserved is unserved and there is no--you know, that is an either/or digital decision. They either have service or they don't.
LS However, we have asked all the applicants to provide that information for their areas as well and we will be evaluating that for its credibility and veracity,
Walden.} All right. Well, let me be the one that weighs in on, for the limited amount of government resource we have, it ought to go to those who don't have access to any service first. That is my own opinion, and I know my time has expired.
|