Rep. John Curtis: Biden’s broadband plan – government-run networks don’t work. Here’s what we learned in Utah



Broadband web has grow to be a part of America’s core infrastructure. It’s proper to deal with it within the infrastructure debate, however President Biden’s most up-to-date proposal presents a misguided resolution: Giving authorities extra management. 

As I can attest from my time as mayor of Provo Metropolis, that is an ineffective technique to pursue the worthy objective of increasing broadband entry, which is extra vital than ever within the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. The higher path is to lean on the experience and innovation of personal firms.

After I served as mayor, no problem loomed bigger than Provo’s government-owned broadband community, which I inherited upon taking workplace. The iProvo community was established with the promise of delivering inexpensive high-speed web connections to all the town’s residents. 


However the community did not successfully attain residents throughout the town and created large prices that had been finally paid for by residents. Our native paper dubbed it a millstone round our necks. The debt we incurred to construct it dictated the town’s each transfer.

We thought-about all of our choices as we regarded for a path ahead, together with letting the community go darkish. My group and I finally determined it was in everybody’s finest curiosity for the federal government to get out of the broadband enterprise. 

Extra from Opinion

After reaching out to many potential patrons, we discovered a non-public firm, Google Fiber, that match the invoice. It had extra experience and assets than us to make the undertaking work; it might use its assets to improve and increase inexpensive web companies for residents. In 2013, Provo Metropolis offered iProvo to Google Fiber for $1.

You learn that proper. We offered it for $1 as a result of that’s how little the government-owned community was value. Its expertise was old-fashioned and its infrastructure was unworkable. 

We needed to come to phrases with the truth that we had a decade-old community and similar to a pc that’s a decade outdated it was close to nugatory. Know-how advances so rapidly that what’s leading edge at this time could also be out of date in just some months.

The entire expertise taught me that government-owned broadband networks have severe flaws that stop their success. 

First, investing in broadband networks entails danger. Even well-financed and skilled personal operators lose cash. Taxpayers don’t join such danger nor ought to taxpayer {dollars} be spent on such dangerous ventures.

The Biden plan would make investments billions in broadband growth whereas giving preferential therapy to government-owned networks.

Second, there may be an inherent downside with the federal government stepping out of its core competency. There are dramatic variations between customary authorities capabilities – together with streets, sewers, parks and city-owned utilities – and the extremely aggressive and fast-changing world of broadband deployment.


This expertise additionally taught me the important lesson that the personal sector is much better outfitted to deal with such a difficult, vital and dangerous funding. All of that is additional supported by the truth that our nation’s most profitable telecommunication firms have invested over $2 trillion in these networks over the previous 25 years. They clearly see the technological potential, but keenly perceive the challenges of delivering these cutting-edge companies.

That’s one of many explanation why I’m so involved in regards to the Biden administration’s rural broadband proposal. The Biden plan would make investments billions in broadband growth whereas giving preferential therapy to government-owned networks. There’s no query rural broadband funding is required in Utah and lots of different elements of rural America, however the Biden strategy is totally misguided.

Examine after research exhibits that government-owned networks fall quick. Provo is way from the one proof. One current research discovered that solely 10% of such networks generated sufficient income to cowl the prices of growth over a 30-40 12 months span. Practically 60% didn’t make sufficient cash to cowl their working prices. 5 didn’t anticipate to take action for 100 years. One other research, from my residence state, discovered that such networks “lead to negligible advantages for private and non-private customers.”

Given the proof, it’s inappropriate for federal broadband funding to favor government-owned networks. The White Home and Congress ought to let states and native governments resolve when and the place that’s the case. A greater path is for Congress to streamline the rules that stand in the way in which of rural broadband rollout, and I have launched two payments to that impact.


I’m additionally involved about one other spherical of spending. Congress invested a whole bunch of billions of federal assets into broadband deployment over the previous 12 months, together with in broadband programming for rural and underserved communities. As a substitute of proposing billions extra, we must be concentrating on stretching the assets we allotted so far as potential.

Congress has a bipartisan observe file of good investments in rural broadband. Whereas the Biden administration’s infrastructure plan is well-intentioned, it doesn’t meet that customary. It spends an excessive amount of cash and favors the government-owned networks which might be nearly at all times a nasty funding. Individuals with out broadband web entry – in Utah and in each state – deserve higher.



Supply hyperlink