National Broadband Plan (United States) facts for kids

Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan was a big plan by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Their goal was to make internet access better and more available across the United States. The FCC was asked to create this plan by a law called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. They showed their ideas on March 16, 2010.

This law didn't give the FCC direct power to carry out the plan. But it did say the FCC had to create a detailed strategy. This strategy needed to make broadband affordable and used as much as possible. The aim was to help people, improve community involvement, keep people safe, develop communities, and help with healthcare. It also aimed to boost energy independence, education, jobs, and the economy.

The official website for the plan, broadband.gov, talked a lot about energy and the environment. Other goals included "21st century care," "economic opportunity," "health care," and "public safety." The plan also featured maps to show where internet was available. It also aimed to find "broadband dead zones" where there was no internet. A big goal was to give 100 million American homes access to 100 Mbit/s (megabits per second) connections by 2020. This meant wiring large parts of the U.S. for internet. The federal Rural Utilities Service, which provided phone service to rural areas, would also get upgrades. The plan also asked TV broadcasters to share their airwaves for wireless broadband.

U.S. Representative Edward J. Markey (a Democrat from Massachusetts) was the person who asked for this plan. He praised the FCC's plan as a "roadmap." He said it would "ensure that every American has access to the tools they need to succeed." The Obama administration supported the plan. Former FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski even called it his "top priority."

What Were the Main Goals of the Plan?

The goals of the National Broadband Plan were clearly explained on the broadband.gov website. They aimed to make internet access faster, more widespread, and more affordable for everyone.

Faster Internet for Homes

• By 2020, at least 100 million U.S. homes should have affordable internet. This internet would have download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second. Upload speeds would be at least 50 megabits per second. This would make things like streaming videos and online gaming much smoother.

Leading in Mobile Technology

• The United States wanted to be the best in mobile innovation. This meant having the fastest and most widespread wireless networks compared to any other country.

Affordable Access for Everyone

• Every American should have affordable access to strong broadband service. They should also have the tools and skills to use it if they choose. This aimed to close the gap for people who couldn't afford internet.

High-Speed for Important Places

• Every American community should have affordable access to at least 1 gigabit per second broadband service. This was for important places like schools, hospitals, and government buildings. This would help these places serve their communities better.

Safety for First Responders

• To keep Americans safe, every first responder (like police and firefighters) needed access to a nationwide wireless network. This network would allow them to communicate easily with each other.

Smart Energy Use

• To help America lead in clean energy, everyone should be able to use broadband. This would let them track and manage their energy use in real-time. This could help save energy and money.

How Did the Plan Affect Wireless Signals?

The plan also wanted to move around wireless signals to make mobile internet better. This was because more and more people were using mobile data. For example, AT&T Mobility saw its data use go up by 8000% between 2007 and 2010. This was when the iPhone first came out and became very popular.

Experts warned that without new wireless signal space, demand would soon be much higher than what was available. They also noted that many people, especially those with lower incomes, relied on mobile internet as their main way to get online.

The plan suggested making 300 MHz of wireless signal space available for public use within 5 years. It aimed for 500 MHz after 10 years. This space would come from areas like Broadcast TV and mobile satellite services. To do this, the FCC needed to find unused or underused signal spaces. Then, they would ask current users to give up some of their space. The plan suggested giving incentives to make this process faster and avoid long legal fights.

These wireless signal sales, called spectrum auctions, were approved by Congress in 2012. These auctions could bring in billions of dollars for the government.

How Did the Plan Help with Energy?

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said the broadband plan was key for "smart grid" technology. This technology could help power plants reduce their pollution by 12 percent. That's like taking 55 million cars off the road!

One goal of the plan was for Americans to be able to share their energy use data safely. They could send it to any energy management service they chose. This would help them manage how much energy they used. For example, smart devices could turn on when electricity was cheaper or when renewable energy (like wind power) was more available.

Companies like General Electric and Whirlpool even announced "Smart Green Grid Initiatives." This meant making "smart appliances" that could talk to the energy system. These appliances could then use energy at the best times.

Why Was This Plan Needed?

The United States was falling behind other countries like Japan, the EU, and South Korea in energy technology. Improving energy management became a national priority. Also, relying on oil from certain countries was a growing security concern for the U.S. The Obama administration wanted to use "smart grid" technologies. These technologies need reliable internet to work.

Also, in 2012, only about 65 percent of Americans had broadband internet. The U.S. ranked 16th in the world. Countries like South Korea (95 percent) and Singapore (88 percent) had much higher rates. Genachowski said that many countries had broadband plans. He noted that the lack of internet access in rural and low-income areas in the U.S. was "leaving millions behind."

The goal was for 100 million homes to have 100 Mbit/s service by 2020. In 2009, 200 million people had broadband, but 14 million had no access at all.

An FCC survey found that the average price for broadband was $41 per month. About 36 percent of people who didn't use it said it was too expensive. Some people lacked the skills to use it, and others worried about "safety and privacy."

To help more people get online, the plan suggested giving money to service providers. These providers would then offer free or low-cost internet to certain users. A "Connect America Fund" would help areas without good service. This money would come from the Universal Service Fund, which already helped with phone service and internet for schools and libraries. There would also be a "Mobility Fund" for states to create their own broadband programs. A "Digital Literacy Corps" would teach people about the internet. Broadband would also be added to the FCC's Lifeline and Link-Up program, which helps low-income people with phone service.

What Were the Challenges and Criticisms?

The National Broadband Plan faced some challenges and people had different opinions about it.

How Much Would It Cost?

The FCC said the plan could cost anywhere from $20 billion to $350 billion. This was just to build and start the system, not to keep it running. For example, a National Emergency Response Network was estimated to cost $12 billion to $16 billion. There were also costs for helping families afford computers and training them to use the internet. All these costs would add up to many billions of dollars.

One idea to pay for it was to use $4.6 billion per year from the Universal Service Fund. This money would go to a new fund to help with broadband. However, if the total cost was closer to $350 billion, this money wouldn't be enough. The government might have to cover the rest, possibly through taxes.

Would It Stop New Ideas?

Some people worried that a national plan would slow down new ideas and growth in the internet industry. Economist Robert Atkinson argued that such a plan might make companies less likely to offer lower prices, better products, or new ideas. This is because there would be less competition.

Who Has the Power?

Another question was whether Congress actually gave the FCC the power to carry out the plan. Some people thought the FCC was only allowed to *draft* the plan, not implement it. State officials worried that rural areas might lose their current phone or cell service if support was moved to broadband. They also worried that the FCC's idea of supporting only one internet provider per area could create monopolies. This might mean some rural areas would end up with no phone or cell service at all.

How Did Rules and Laws Affect the Plan?

The FCC saw broadband as an "information service," which meant it had fewer rules. However, a court ruling in 2010 disagreed. This ruling said the FCC didn't have the power to make certain decisions about internet companies. For example, in 2007, the FCC tried to make Comcast allow the use of BitTorrent, which Comcast saw as a competitor. Comcast argued that the FCC had no power to do this.

Because of this, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski wanted to change how broadband was defined. He wanted it to be a "common carrier," like roads. This would mean all internet traffic would have equal access, just like all cars can use a road.

In May 2010, Genachowski said the rules for broadband companies would be less strict. He didn't want the FCC to seem "heavy-handed." But many Republicans in Congress and at the FCC, along with cable and phone companies, were expected to oppose these rules. For example, "network neutrality" would mean broadband providers had to let competitors use their lines for phone service or streaming video. However, Genachowski said networks would not have to share with competitors.

Two of the five FCC commissioners, both Republicans, worried that strict rules would stop companies from investing in and improving their networks. House Minority Leader John Boehner even called the plan "a government takeover of the Internet."

Genachowski said the rules would "support policies that advance our global competitiveness and preserve the Internet as a powerful platform for innovation."

How Did We Get Here?

Early Surveys (2008)

In June 2008, the FCC said that fast internet was available to all Americans. They reported that 47% of adults had internet at home. They also said that 57.8 million U.S. homes had broadband. The FCC believed that everyone had access to affordable internet at home, work, school, and libraries.

However, some within the FCC disagreed. Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein pointed out that the U.S. was falling behind in broadband rankings. Commissioner Michael Copps criticized how the FCC collected its data.

International Comparisons

In 2008, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) released data on broadband. This showed that the U.S. might be behind other developed countries. The United States ranked 15th out of 30 countries in how many people had broadband. Countries like Denmark, the Netherlands, and South Korea were much higher. The average internet speed in the U.S. was 4.9 Mbit/s, while the OECD average was 9.2 Mbit/s.

Critics argued that the FCC's earlier report was wrong. They said the FCC used a definition of broadband that was too generous. They also said the FCC didn't measure actual internet speeds.

Connecting Schools

On June 6, 2013, President Barack Obama announced "ConnectEd" at Mooresville Middle School in Mooresville, North Carolina. This plan aimed to bring high-speed internet to many schools that didn't have it. Under a 1996 law, schools and libraries already paid lower prices for telecommunications. Obama wanted to expand this program to include internet access. White House aides said that only one-fifth of American students had high-speed internet at school, while all students in South Korea did. Obama asked the FCC to "connect 99 percent of America's students to high-speed broadband Internet within five years."

Why Is Broadband So Important?

Internet access has become a very important tool for progress and social development. How many people have broadband internet is now seen as a key sign of a country's economic health. Many people believe the U.S. is falling behind in both how many people have broadband and how fast that internet is.

Because of this, there have been many discussions about whether the U.S. needs a National Broadband Plan. People have different ideas about why it's needed or why it might not be a good idea.

Meeting Public Needs

• Today, internet access is seen as a basic utility, like phones, water, and electricity. Most people agree that you need internet to fully take part in society. For example, in the 2008 presidential elections, candidates shared weekly videos online that weren't available anywhere else. Supporters of a national broadband plan say this shows how vital internet access is for full community involvement.

Entertainment and Learning

• Broadband offers entertainment that TV and radio can't. You can watch "webisodes" (mini-episodes not shown on TV) or behind-the-scenes footage. This shows how internet changes entertainment.
• Many educational tools, like online classes and interactive learning, are only found online. Supporters believe internet access for all is needed to create equal opportunities for learning.
• Online libraries, textbooks, and encyclopedias make the internet a great tool for learning throughout life.

Economic Growth and Jobs

• Supporters say internet access helps people contribute to economic growth. Many services have moved online, like banking and checking utility accounts.
• More people could research jobs and investments, leading to more stable finances.
• More people could work from home, which helps with personal needs and reduces travel.

Connecting Everyone

• A national plan could bring broadband internet to rural areas. Many people in these areas want internet but can't get it. This is because low population means high costs and low profits for providers.
• The plan could also help people in poor urban areas. In 2008, many low-income families couldn't afford broadband. Non-profit groups like One Economy were the main source of help for these families.

Healthcare and Government

• More people could research hospitals and doctors online. This is especially helpful for those in rural areas who travel far for medical care.
• If everyone had internet, the government could communicate with citizens more quickly. This would help with things like paperwork and providing aid during disasters.

Concerns About Government Involvement

• Those against a national plan worried that government control would slow down new ideas. They believed it would reduce competition and lead to less profit for companies.
• Opponents also warned that the government might waste billions of dollars. They thought the government might build internet systems that people didn't need or couldn't use. They believed the government wouldn't pay as much attention to customer needs as private companies do.
• Some also worried that more broadband could lead to jobs moving overseas. They questioned if broadband truly led to economic growth, saying statistics could be misleading.

What Did the Plan Mean for the Future?

The National Broadband Plan aimed to fix the problem of 100 million Americans not having internet at home. It also wanted to improve the U.S.'s internet speed, which was behind other countries. The FCC made recommendations to solve these issues and get the most benefits from broadband.

This plan focused on how broadband could help in education, healthcare, energy, the environment, government, community involvement, public safety, and economic chances. It also recognized that states needed to be actively involved for the plan to work.

For State and Local Governments

The FCC made several recommendations for state and local governments:

• Congress should make it clear that local governments can build their own broadband networks. This is important where private companies don't want to invest.
• Federal and state rules should help schools and hospitals group their internet needs. This can make broadband cheaper for them.
• State lawmakers are key partners in helping important institutions get internet, training, and services.
• States should also offer digital education programs. These would help people of all backgrounds learn how to use the internet.
• Congress should let state and local governments get lower prices for internet services by joining federal contracts.

The FCC also suggested including tribal leaders in broadband programs. They recommended building new networks in areas without service. They also proposed the Connect America Fund to help close the internet availability gap in these areas.

Making Broadband Affordable and Accessible

The FCC also focused on making broadband more affordable and increasing training:

• Expand programs like Lifeline Assistance and Link-Up America. These programs offer discounts on phone service and could include internet.
• Create a National Digital Literacy Program. This would teach people the skills needed for the digital world.
• Collect better information on internet prices, performance, and competition. This would help leaders understand affordability problems in specific communities.

See also

• Broadband universal service
• Broadband mapping in the United States
• Policies promoting wireless broadband in the United States