Tag Archives: wifi

Edwards: WiFi For Everyone!

(While this is a national and not a state-focused story, I think everyone on this site will be interested to hear about ways to move toward the goal of universal access.  Think about how this could impact local blogs if so many more people in this state could use the Internet, particularly in those underserved areas.  It would open up the conversation to include everyone.  There’s more at my site.)

This is the “chicken in every pot” for the 21st century.  And as you will see, it’s extremely doable and completely worthwhile for American competition, entrepreneurship and technological advancement.

In short, the FCC is about to auction off a portion of the broadband spectrum.  All the major telcos like Verizon and AT&T are expected to bid on the prime real estate.  But John Edwards has a better idea.  He wants to have the FCC use that spectrum to increase Internet access for all Americans, young or old, rich or poor.  This is the text of his letter to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin:

Dear Chairman Martin:

The upcoming 700 megahertz spectrum auction presents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to shape the next generation of American technology.

In recent years, the Internet has grown to touch everything and transform much of what it touches.  It’s not the answer to everything, but it can powerfully accelerate the best of America. It improves our democracy by making quiet voices loud, improves our economy by making small markets big, and improves opportunity by making unlikely dreams possible.

As you know, the Federal Communications Commission is now preparing to auction the 700 megahertz slice of the spectrum.  This “beachfront” band is particularly well suited to wireless broadband because it has wide coverage and can easily pass through walls. 

By setting bid and service rules that unleash the potential of smaller new entrants, you can transform information opportunity for people across America — rural and urban, wealthy and not. As much as half of the spectrum should be set aside for wholesalers who can lease access to smaller start-ups, which has the potential to improve service to rural and underserved areas. Additionally, anyone winning rights to this valuable public resource should be required not to discriminate among data and services and to allow any device to be attached to their service. Finally, bidding should be anonymous to avoid collusion and retaliatory bids.

I urge you to seize this chance to transform the Internet and the future.

Sincerely,

John Edwards

Not only is Edwards asking that the principle of net neutrality be mandated for anyone who buys this spectrum (which is a big victory in and of itself), but he wants a significant portion to be used to wire America.  Ultimately, broadband should be no different than electricity; the access should come standard in any home, and you should pay the way you pay your electric bill.  Additionally, we should be wiring rural areas the way that FDR pushed rural electrification projects as part of the New Deal.  It was actually predicated on the same premise.

Although nearly 90 percent of urban dwellers had electricity by the 1930s, only ten percent of rural dwellers did. Private utility companies, who supplied electric power to most of the nation’s consumers, argued that it was too expensive to string electric lines to isolated rural farmsteads. Anyway, they said, most farmers, were too poor to be able to afford electricity […]

By 1939 the REA had helped to establish 417 rural electric cooperatives, which served 288,000 households. The actions of the REA encouraged private utilities to electrify the countryside as well. By 1939 rural households with electricity had risen to 25 percent […]

When farmers did receive electric power their purchase of electric appliances helped to increase sales for local merchants. Farmers required more energy than city dwellers, which helped to offset the extra cost involved in bringing power lines to the country.

Just as FDR worked to bridge the electrical divide in the 1930s, we should be bridging the digital divide today.  Poor and rural areas should be given the capacity to use the Internet, which will open new markets, allow for increased communication and expanded educational tools, and create that equality of opportunity that ought to be a goal.  That a top-tier Presidential candidate is pushing this forward-thinking a policy is very cheering.

President Peskin speaks

President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors Aaron Peskin spoke at a packed meeting of the Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club yesterday, and here are some of the things he said:

He opened by calling the current Board of Supervisors the most progressive 6 years stretch of the Board ever, but emphasized that we need to ensure that when he and three other members of the 2000 Progressive Sweep are termed out in 2008, the people we elect are at least as progressive as the outgoing Supervisors. “Chris Daly thinks we can trade up”, he said, but we need to start now recruiting good candidates to run.

more on the flip…

Peskin speaks

He mentioned there is a movement afoot to extend term limits in San Francisco as well as at the state level, and he’d welcome that. 

One thing he thinks could be a factor against maintaining a progressive majority at the board is the upcoming fight between Leno and Migden. He compared it to Ammiano’s run for mayor in 1999, where the run actually helped kick off the momentum that led to us making such huge gains in 2000. He worries that this race, however, will end up fracturing the queer and progressive communities, which will make it that much harder to do the work we need to do in November. “It’s a disaster waiting to happen”, he said, adding that he would enter the race himself if that would somehow help.

He denied that he is running for mayor, even when members of the audience offered to dust off their “Run Aaron Run” buttons from last time. When asked about Newsom, he pointed out that the Mayor’s taking credit for a lot of things he didn’t actually do, like the Health Access Plan, but “as long as we have the plan, and it’s fully funded, I don’t care who takes the credit.” It would be an uphill battle to defeat Newsom, he said, unless the situation changes, “Maybe the third shoe will drop.”

He reserved his harshest criticisms of Newsom for Proposition A, the affordable housing bond. The bond lost by one percent, Peskin pointed out, and

if the mayor had shown one iota of leadership, had shown up to one thing, we would have won Prop A. He has all this political capital [from his 70% approval rating] and he does nothing with it. Political capital only means anything if you spend it. It’s not who dies with the most toys wins.

Peskin admitted that when it came to the rising tide of violence in San Francisco, the Board doesn’t have all the answers, “It’s one of the most vexing things we have to deal with,” but he did point to the passage of foot patrols, and the beginning of “a serious conversation” about community policing, which he complained means different things to different people. “One thing we can do is make sure we have the services in place that people need.”

I asked Peskin about his position on the Wi-Fi network, and he sees it pretty clearly as an attempt to create a franchise like with cable, and “I will never vote for another franchise.” He sees fiber as the way forward, first as the backbone for a hybrid-style network, then eventually to everyone’s door. He feels that signing the Earthlink deal will impede moving forward with such a network. I didn’t get a chance to ask about the digital inclusion aspects of the issue, but when someone else asked him about why the mayor was pushing this so hard, Peskin’s answer was that “administrations, especially when you’re a man, are judged by what you build. So everyone says, ‘Joe Alioto, he built the Transamerica Pyramid!’ and ‘Willie Brown build Mission Bay,’ and Gavin wants to build something too.” He went on to say he thought Newsom should be proud to point to the “civil disobedience” of the 2004 gay marriages as an accomplishment, and that as long as Newsom’s going to take credit for the health plan he could take credit for that, too. Perhaps most revealingly, he claimed that “the Mayor knows this [the Earthlink deal] is a lost cause.”

He also touched on the Ethics Commission (ours is understaffed compared to San Jose and LA), condo conversion limits (he’s for maintaining them at the current level, although he’d have been willing to increase the number in exchange for a deal on TICs), the police (he still wishes there was a way to get them to live in San Francisco) and a few other issues I didn’t get a chance to write down and don’t remember.

cross-posted at Left in SF (note that all quotes are as I wrote them down, and have not been verified for accuracy, and the rest is my paraphrase from memory)

SF Municipal Wifi debate

I’m a bit out of reach these days, but I wanted to point out Sasha’s excellent work at Left in SF on the San Francisco municipal wireless debate. Check out all of his posts here and his wrapup of the debate here. There’s going to be a hearing on the program this afternoon, and I’ve heard Sasha will be involved. I know Google and Earthlink are fighting to preserve the sweetheart deal, but we need to do what’s best for The City, and whether that’s municipal wifi or GoogleFi, the residents of SF should come first.  Let’s just make sure we get  this right.

So, if you’re in SF, thank Sasha for doing such a great job for us on this issue.