Change or Cha-ching?

Change has come to America. Well, sort of.

On "K" Street - home to Washington's most powerful corporate lobbyists - it's business as usual.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the scrum of lobbyists gathering around President Obama's economic stimulus package. Hearings started yesterday in the House Appropriations Committee and they're already lining the halls outside chambers.

Without a strong public interest voice at the table, lobbyists could steer billions in taxpayer dollars toward a corporate welfare boondoggle. This lost opportunity would be felt most acutely in our efforts to close America's gaping digital divide.

The Internet Economy

Obama's Kids

Obama has set aside $6 billion for broadband deployment and has been outspoken about the Internet's role in jump starting our "21st century economy," allowing small rural businesses to compete in global markets and giving every child a chance to access fast and open Internet technology.

For Ashea Williams, a special education teacher at Washington D.C.'s Arts and Technology Academy, it's a change that couldn't come soon enough for her young students. "A lot of our students do not have Internet access," she said last week. "So a lot of the activities that we do here at school they cannot expand upon at home. So the learning ends here."

If done right - by building an open and affordable network with plentiful service options -- Obama's economic stimulus plan could close the digital divide for many of Williams' students, and also for those living in rural America.

Business as Usual

But don't tell that to the many lobbyists and "analysts" plying their trade in Washington.

In their ears, "economic stimulus" means an opportunity to cash in on lucrative deals shilling for corporate interests.

One of them, Robert Atkinson of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, has been busy convincing the Beltway that this taxpayer money should be handed over to broadband incumbents like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon -- with few to no strings attached.

"We have got to focus on what this is all about," he said recently at a forum on Internet and the economic stimulus package. "This is not about broadband reform -- this is about stimulus... Stimulus has to have one goal, and that is to get as much investment in as fast a time as possible."

Get out your DC decoder rings to descramble this message. What Atkinson really means is that change isn't needed for America's Internet - not even at a time when our country has slid to 22nd in the world in high-speed Internet adoption.

In Atkinson's view, we merely need to funnel taxpayer dollars to the same phone and cable companies that got us into this problem. They'll pocket the cash and continue to:

1. Exert their near complete control over America's broadband market;
   
2. Stifle new innovation and market entrants; and
   
3. Charge users higher prices for slower speeds than what's available to people in other developed nations.

When Atkinson says: "This is not about broadband reform" he really means it's about business as usual.

And he's not alone. Legions of lobbyists are taking a stand with the phone and cable companies to fight conditions like non-discrimination and open access that would guarantee that this public money actually serves the public good.

Stimulus for Whom?

The stimulus bill as it's drafted sets a different tone. It states that companies receiving broadband grants must allow consumers to access the Internet with no controls placed on their Web traffic or choice of content. Another provision calls for "open access" rules -- which guarantee more competition -- to guide this stimulus.

Nowhere does it say that taxpayers should prop up a powerful duopoly that has served us poorly in the past. But this could change if the lobbyists get the ear of Congress and strike these conditions from the bill.

Stimulus is critical and the Internet has an important part to play in spreading economic opportunity. But simply enriching AT&T is not the answer.

We need to preserve these built-in guarantees so that our public money will build a better, more open and affordable system.

But Congress is moving so quickly, and big phone and cable are lobbying so ferociously, that we risk watching this chance turn into yet another corporate handout - one that enriches the phone and cable companies instead of investing in the change that Ashea Williams and her students need.

Comments

[Woofer58]

I have very nice high-speed access right now, BUT I pay dearly for it... like $63 per month. I have no other high-speed choices in my city. It's a monopoly play by this provider. They have systemactically interferred with plans to wire the city with hi-speed wireless. They have also decided to go to pricing tiers for users that have heavy needs such as Netflix. Since they are also a cable provider, I see this as a direct play to get you to pay more for internet that can provide TV programming.

My greatest hope will be a competitor, at least for price. Quality should be a given, as well as speed. The technology exists. So what's the problem ??
I can get stupidly fast internet in Denmark for about $20 per month. But I don't live there. I live in a city pushing a million people and I'm stuck with one overpriced provider. Something is nuts about this.

Can you guess who my provider is ???

[tomas0808]

I think we need a lobbyist purge, Russian style

[DLBSR]

The electorate must demand all lobbyists, PACS, and special interest groups be banned from the hall of Congress. For far too long these groups have wielded far too much power on Capitol Hill to the detriment of Main Street. If you believe our Congressional representatives and Senators are not unduly influenced by the vast amounts of money (in the form of contributions to favorite charities, campaign war chests, etc) and material gifts offerd by these groups, then I have a couple of defaulted Sub-prime mortgages I will sell you. Main Street has lost it's sway with our elected officials to these groups. We on Main Street simply cannot compete. What we must do is scrap the two-party system in this country. The system is corrupt and malfeasent. It serves no interests except it's own and it's owners. The discordant and caustic rhetoric generated each day from inside the beltway is designed only to divide and polarize the electorate, thus permitting those in power to remain in power whilst Main Street is left with no recourse except to do except blog...blo­g...blog..­.

[DuganS1]

Actually lobbyists, PACs, and special interest groups play a very important and necessary role in our system of govt. Without them, we'd just have a bunch of congressmen who know virtually nothing about an issue making many important laws/regul­ations/dec­isions regarding that issue. Have you listened to many committee hearings on C-SPAN or CNN? It's startling how little many congressmen know, even about issues that their own committees are responsible for dealing with.

[marinade]

The money should go to the "risk takers, the doers, the makers of things", not to a bunch of pigs at the trough.

[One more Thing]

Beautiful!

[Aaror]

Ironically the solution is already here, but untapped:
Imagine if you will that the existing structure of the internet was shifted in the direction that Kazaa has pioneered. Any computer can be a host or node on the internet, and can pass signals to other computers. Then add 3G wireless and wireless networks, now communication doesn't have to travel over land lines. Imagine an internet that bounces from computer to computer over wireless networks, unbound by the control of ATT and their set? Landlines would only be used to augment that network, add speed to it.
I know there are technical problems with that idea, but imagine a free internet...

[000Jade000]

"One of them, Robert Atkinson of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, has been busy convincing the Beltway that this taxpayer money should be handed over to broadband incumbents like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon -- with few to no strings attached"

In my view, NOBODY that charges their customers at the same time that they WIRETAP their customers for the government deserves ANYTHING.

[Zeroes]

Want a good economy?

1. Outlaw variable rate mortgages.
2. Refi the people that were duped into variable rates for a mortgage.
3. The recent low mortgage rates should be for home purchases only.
4. The surge in refi's are killing the dead real estate market. People with good credit are refiancing rather than buying a home.
5. Mandatory 10 to 20 year sentences for white collar crime.
6. Take the politics out of who can qualify for a mortgage. Only loan money to those that and will pay it back.

[GrainOSand]

...i.e., the common sense approach.

[DuganS1]

There is nothing inherently wrong with "variable rates" for mortgages. Consumers certainly aren't "duped" into getting such loans as they can be very beneficial to many borrowers and consumers should be able to figure out if that's the best option for them. And what's wrong with refi's? And on earth is that "killing" the real estate market? Every loan by a financial institution ever given was given with the belief that the consumer would be able to repay it.

[GrainOSand]

"Every loan by a financial institution ever given was given with the belief that the consumer would be able to repay it."

You do not really believe this, not wth all of the news concerning credit default swaps?

[GrainOSand]

In street vernacular the lobbyist are saying, “give us the grip (money), we got this." This is one specific area where I have an expectation of change. With minimum requirements for government I humbly ask, can you not be so blatant in your expression of corruption? That seems a small request. If business/corporate interests own America, just tell us and we will adjust, otherwise cease functioning as if that is the case. The hypocrisy in the democracy, that has been the killer of dreams. This is not cited in anger, bitterness, excuse, apology, or from any standpoint that is weak, dependent, or needy. I state this out of wry humor (hard to express in words). We bend over and complain about lower back pain. I say we -- conversationally speaking.

I wanted to believe -- but they kept telling me fairytales, like how they were all about the people. They do not know what “the people” means. They? Yes, the nameless, the faceless, the esteemed, and the credentialed, “they” who allow self-interest to manifest the beast in them. We all want to be ok. The question becomes, at what price and to whom. Luxurious self-magnification on the backs of a struggling mass is unsustainable as a flea on a dogs’ back. Eventually that dog is going to scratch, or eventually the infestation will kill the dog, either way, change is gonna come.

[Aaror]

The corpo's can't say that they own America because the senators and reps who represent them would be voted out if they were that blatent. We have the power, the corpos just try to keep us from using it.

[DuganS1]

Corruption? Would you rather have business making decisions based on profit, or government making decisions on political favors or for continuing to get themselves reelected?

[ErnestineBass]

Still trying to "drown it in the bathtub", so the "trains will run on time", Dugan?

There's a word for governments ruled by corporations...it's called f a s c i s t.

[Antifascist-08]

Neither.

[GrainOSand]

Profit? What exactly is that? Is profit defined to be when I and my cronies make money at great cost to thousands and millions of others? I have worked for some of the largest most profit driven companies in America. The best companies are those who realize that their greatest asset is their employees not their balance sheet. It is not that these companies (the good ones) ignore profit and loss, it is that they prioritize profit and loss against ethics, fairness, and a desire to bring a quality product to the consuming marketplace. Companies must make money to exist. I think you can be profitable without seeking to corrupt the system such that it increases profits. We waste far too much of our precious monetary resource on the legal profession. The Native American warned about the ills of the contract. History has shown me that they were prescient in this regard. The legal tool has been used effectively to shroud theft and schemes of greed in a cloud of confusion as massive wealth slips into the night never to be seen again.

I like the current trajectory for we are moving towards revolution if things do not change. So, by my very cynical viewpoint, I say to the corporations keep doing the evil that you do and a nation will rise up and stomp you into oblivion as we start over. If you think this is farfetched, I hope you are right.

[marinade]

Greedy SOB's putting corporations before their country.

Maybe they will want to consider potential backlash from the consumer when the rip-offs are finally
revealed.

[ThePeacemakers]

Try to play capitalism instead of monoply with the bailout.
Actually use bailout money to prop up small businesses and competitors to these "too big to fail" nation killers.

[larry278]

There is a distinct probabibility, if not a certainty, that most, if not all, of these undertakin­gs,entrrpr­ises, etc which are ominously & almost universally said to be, "...too big to fail,,,", will actually fail in the very near term future, before 6/20/10. The world's capitalist economies will no longer exist. A socialist economy will replace the dead & rotted capitalist ecomonies of the world.. Why bother propping up capitalist economies, enterprises, etc which are certain to fail by 6/20/10? There is no sense in throwing good money into these hoplessly doomed enterprises.
The world will need the funds to build a socialist economy for the world.