Analysis

AT&T recently announced multi-gigabit broadband plans on its fiber connections. The company has priced 2-Gbps broadband at $110 per month and 5-Gbps broadband at $180. AT&T isn’t the first company to offer multi-gigabit broadband speeds and joins other large internet service providers (ISPs). For now, multi-gigabit broadband is mostly a marketing gimmick. It’s a way for an ISP to tell the public that its networks are fast.

The total projected collected interstate and international end-user revenue base to be used in determining the contribution factor for the Universal Service support mechanisms for 2Q2022 is $8,751,403,396.

Now that Democrats are back in charge of the White House, the issue of net neutrality and the threat of rate regulation has surfaced again. The big internet service providers (ISPs) have been trying to derail or delay confirmation of Gigi Sohn [Senior Fellow and Public Advocate at the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society] as the fifth Federal Communications Commissioner because they know that one of the first actions of the FCC under Chairman Jessica Rosenworcel will be to reintroduce Title II regulation.

The goal of universal service is to ensure that essential communications services are available and affordable for all. Equity remains a bedrock principle: the notion that society should take steps to ensure that all (or nearly all) citizens can use communications networks. However, whereas it was once fairly easy to identify the goal—widespread adoption of telephone service—today the situation is not as clear. Should, for instance, “universal service” include internet access? If so, at what level of service?

Until the pandemic hit, I rarely thought about upload bandwidth. I mostly used upload bandwidth to send files to people, and I rarely cared if they received the files immediately – I was happy as long as files got sent. But the pandemic changed everything for millions of people.

The poor state of rural broadband can be traced to the ways that the big telcos reacted to industry changes. Small telcos built rural networks, but large telcos gobbled them up over time. The big rural telcos then neglected rural properties in reaction to the changing economics from the deregulation of long-distance and local telephone service. Small telcos showed that it wasn’t necessary to abandon rural properties, but the big telcos stopped making investments in rural networks and for all practical purposes walked away from rural communities.

This is the second in a series of articles looking at which providers are opting to offer services supported by the Affordable Connectivity Program. According to the Leichtman Research Group, just 16 broadband companies provide service to about 96 percent of all wireline broadband subscribers in the US.

Commenting on the digital divide earlier this month, Vice President Harris said that “one of the most common reasons [is c]ost, the expense of [broadband].” She then praised the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), part of the recently enacted Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, for making so many Americans “eligible to receive a monthly discount on their monthly bill.” In fact, the ACP does more than that.