Comments on: Hillary Stumps for Rural Broadband… or Votes

By: Hillary Clinton's Rural Broadband Initiatives Act « Blandin on Broadband

Hillary Clinton's Rural Broadband Initiatives Act « Blandin on Broadband — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 17:11:04 +0000

[...] another broadband blogger, posted his comments on the announcement and seems to think that this is great for Iowa voters, but mostly a bill without teeth. The [...]

By: Jesse Kopelman

Jesse Kopelman — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 04:01:12 +0000

GLC, you don't think big telco/cableco know how to work state and local government as well as federal? I guess you're forgetting how back in 2005 a bunch of states were falling all over themselves trying to pass anti-municipal broadband legislation that would make it almost impossible for anyone other than big cable/telco to provide broadband in their state. Historically, this kind of project is better handled at the federal level.

By: Laura Unger

Laura Unger — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 19:09:30 +0000

I think it is really important that access to HIGH SPEED, affordable broadband is an issue in this election. It says in her press statement that her plan has the support of the Communications Workers of America. The CWA has a website http://www.speedmatters.org which lays out a whole range of proposals for increasing access. This is absolutely something the government should be involved in as the lack of access will mean exclusion from so much information and so many services. It looks like on this one Hillary is getting advice from people who really know the industry.

By: GLC

GLC — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 17:06:17 +0000

If it's as successful as her universal health care then rural folks should get used to 56k dial-up access. This is best left to the state and local level, where they can have more control over what gets built out and who gets to participate. The big telco's will no douby line the pockets of the politico's and suck up all those federal dollars while the boonie folk get empty promises. If Vermont pulls off their e-state initiative, then all the other states should follow their lead.

By: Jesse Kopelman

Jesse Kopelman — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 23:08:38 +0000

The people who question government's role in getting services out to the people need to study their history. Not only was government action needed to get telephony out to everyone, it was even needed for electricity. There were plenty of rural areas with no electricity well into the 1930s!

By: Paul Kapustka

Paul Kapustka — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 19:44:02 +0000

Tim, the US gubmint has a long history of providing funds for "universal service" -- which historically has meant that every town, no matter how rural, should have basic phone service. There is a push from several sectors now (esp rural senators) to make basic broadband the new "universal service," and to keep or even expand the tax now paid on most communications services to do so.

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 18:51:11 +0000

Since when should this be the role of proper government?

By: Sramana Mitra

Sramana Mitra — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 18:33:06 +0000

Do you think she knows what she's talking about? Here's a profile of one of the leaders in rural telecom: Citizen Communication, and here's an interview with their CEO, Maggie Wilderotter. At least, Hillary and Maggie should have a woman to woman chat!

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 18:02:17 +0000

Hmm. It's too bad she doesn't have action to back that one up. NYS is a wealth of opportunities to help out rural folk with broadband. My parents and a friend in Northern New York have no options; they watch TV on satellite and don't have cable passing by their house.