Problems Funding Rural Broadband
ProPublica’s story Rural Broadband Stimulus Program Slammed in Gov’t Report points out that connecting rural areas continues to be problematic.
The Rural Utilities Service’s broadband program faced heavy criticism in 2005 when auditors found irregularities (PDF) with a quarter of the funds the program had received in its first four years of operation. In one case, the program loaned $45 million to wire affluent subdivisions in the Houston suburbs—including one that was built around a golf course and another outside one of the richest cities in Texas.
…“We remain concerned with RUS’ current direction of the broadband program, particularly as they receive greater funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act,” Assistant Inspector General Robert W. Young wrote. “RUS’ broadband program may not meet the Recovery Act’s objective of awarding funds to projects that provide service to the most rural residents that do not have access to broadband service.”
No surprise there. Projects want to go where the easy money is, and “rural” (less than 20,000 people) mean that there are problems inherent in the build-out (not enough people to be “profitable” in the incumbent duopoly sense, and/or trees and mountains getting in the way, for example).
Profitability, however, is not the appropriate perspective or framework. The government is making funds available so that the benefits of broadband reach more of the nation’s citizens. As Sean McLaughlin of the Times-Standard points out in his article What broadband access means to rural areas such as ours,
Representing most of the land and water resources, rural communities are essential for the well-being of our nation and interdependent with the 80 percent of our population that live in non-rural communities. At the same time, remoteness and isolation challenge rural people who are more likely to be poor, undereducated and unhealthy. Of the 250 poorest counties in the United States, 244 are rural. So the promise and opportunity of new communications technologies to improve health, education and public safety for rural communities are particularly important to our nation.
It’s not for lack of desire or hard-working people in rural areas that will help make this happen. Rather it seems to be a lack of imagination on the part of broadband suppliers. Creative partnerships are out there.
Related posts: