----- Forwarded message from Richard Morrison <rmorrisonat_private> ----- From: "Richard Morrison" <rmorrisonat_private> Subject: CEI's Weekly Commentary: Lieberman on Broadband Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 13:10:09 -0400 CEI C:\SPIN This issue: One Small Two-Step for Political Man: Joe Lieberman on Broadband This week's c:\spin, on broadband policy, is by James Gattuso <http://www.heritage.org/staff/gattuso.html> , Research Fellow in Regulatory Policy, The Heritage Foundation <http://www.heritage.org/> , May 31, 2002. As a rule of thumb, one should be wary of anyone in Washington invoking President Kennedy's call to land a man on the moon. For the past 40 years, every rhetorician worth his salt has called for a Kennedyesque national program to meet their favored goal. Senator Joe Lieberman did that with gusto this week, invoking not just Kennedy, but Eisenhower and Lincoln too, in favor of a broadband industrial policy. Lieberman, who is expected to introduce legislation on the topic next week, is but the latest player in an increasingly crowded Senate broadband debate. Senators Breaux and Nickles introduced a "regulatory parity" bill <http://www.senate.gov/~breaux/releases/2002430907.html> last month, followed by a subsidy plan by Senator Hollings <http://www.senate.gov/~hollings> . John McCain <http://mccain.senate.gov/> is also expected to join the fray soon. Lieberman's 54-page report <http://www.senate.gov/~lieberman/press/white_paper/broadband.pdf> is certainly comprehensive. The major theme: government should adopt a national policy for making broadband a priority. In so doing, Lieberman - a 2004 presidential hopeful -- implicitly scores the Administration for not presenting its views on broadband, proposing to require it to do so within six months. Fair enough - the White House has been conspicuous by its silence <http://www.cei.org/gencon/016,02839.cfm> on broadband regulation. Going further, the report argues for a policy declaring broadband to be a key technology of the future. At every turn, it exudes certainty over the future of this technology. It declares broadband to be a "necessary condition" for improvement in the IT industry. It says the technology "will" transform commerce. Its growth "will" be demand-driven. The benefits "will" be greater than we expect. Based on this, Lieberman proposes a series of steps to subsidize the technology, ranging from tax credits, loans and grants to spending on research. There's certainly reason to be bullish on broadband - I am too. It does have terrific potential. But a little humility is called for. Can anyone, especially government, flatly say this or that technology definitely will be successful and in what way? Government-proclaimed technologies of the future that flopped are numerous. Does anyone remember video dial tone telephone service? Can you say HDTV? The fact is that consumer technologies are notoriously unpredictable. To pretend otherwise is to indulge in Hayak's fatal conceit <http://www.hayekcenter.org/hayekbib/bibcw1.html> . Making broadband an officially favored technology has its practical drawbacks <http://www.cei.org/gencon/016,02223.cfm> as well. Even if we aren't concerned about distorting investments away from other promising technologies, subsidies will likely end up favoring one type of broadband technology over another - regardless of how many times neutrality is pledged. (Slower-speed satellite broadband systems, for example, are unlikely to receive equal favor). Forswearing industrial policy, however, doesn't mean government can't do anything to help broadband. The choice isn't between subsidizing and ignoring this potentially critical service. Why not look toward removing government barriers to its development? On this score, the Lieberman report does make some worthwhile suggestions - such as limiting local right-of-way fees and providing more spectrum for wireless providers. But, on most issues, Lieberman performs an awe-inspiring politician's dance, discussing the topic, grimly intoning how important it is, then moving on without stating a position. (Kids, don't try this at home: only professionals should attempt that kind of two-step). A glaring case in point: in one section, the key issues of competition and the history of FCC regulation are discussed extensively and the various pending proposals outlined. "We cannot avoid debate over competition," the report reminds us. It then goes on to avoid the debate over competition, not even hinting at a position. That's a shame. In a report focused on the need for leadership on broadband policy, Senator Lieberman shuns it in the areas where it is most needed. C:\SPIN is produced by the Competitive Enterprise Institute. ----- End forwarded message ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri May 31 2002 - 12:31:40 PDT