Slashdot Mirror
Trump's Infrastructure Plan Has No Dedicated Money For Broadband (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: President Trump's new 10-year plan for "rebuilding infrastructure in America" doesn't contain any funding specifically earmarked for improving Internet access. Instead, the plan sets aside a pool of funding for numerous types of infrastructure projects, and broadband is one of the eligible categories. The plan's $50 billion Rural Infrastructure Program lists broadband as one of five broad categories of eligible projects.
Eighty percent of the program's $50 billion would be "provided to the governor of each state." Governors would take the lead in deciding how the money would be spent in their states. The other 20 percent would pay for grants that could be used for any of the above project categories. Separately, broadband would be eligible for funding from a proposed $20 billion Transformative Projects Program, along with transportation, clean water, drinking water, energy, and commercial space. Trump's plan would also add rural broadband facilities to the list of eligible categories for Private Activity Bonds, which allow private projects to "benefit from the lower financing costs of tax-exempt municipal bonds." The plan would also let carriers install small cells and Wi-Fi attachments without going through the same environmental and historical preservation reviews required for large towers.
Eighty percent of the program's $50 billion would be "provided to the governor of each state." Governors would take the lead in deciding how the money would be spent in their states. The other 20 percent would pay for grants that could be used for any of the above project categories. Separately, broadband would be eligible for funding from a proposed $20 billion Transformative Projects Program, along with transportation, clean water, drinking water, energy, and commercial space. Trump's plan would also add rural broadband facilities to the list of eligible categories for Private Activity Bonds, which allow private projects to "benefit from the lower financing costs of tax-exempt municipal bonds." The plan would also let carriers install small cells and Wi-Fi attachments without going through the same environmental and historical preservation reviews required for large towers.
Trump and the GOP will claim $50 billion has been set aside anytime anyone asks about funding for any of the myriad of things in the pool because that sounds far better than "1/10,000th of $50 billion."
If the plan did include federal funding for broadband, there'd be bitching about "subsidized ISPs/cable companies/telcos".
Donald Trump only funds programs which further racism, obstruction of justice, or treason.
Moscow Donald cuts finding for anything which impedes his treason, like sanctions on Russia.
I mean it says so right in the summary.
It lets each state determine where the money is needed most
The oil and gas carrying kind... See https://www.truthdig.com/artic...
From, of all places, The Nation:
Russiagate or Intelgate?
The publication of the Republican House Committee memo and reports of other documents increasingly suggest not only a “Russiagate” without Russia but also something darker: The “collusion” may not have been in the White House or the Kremlin.
Was Russiagate produced by the primary leaders of the US intelligence community, not just the FBI? If so, it is the most perilous political scandal in modern American history, and the most detrimental to American democracy. ...
If Russiagate involved collusion among US intelligence agencies, as now seems likely, why was it undertaken? There are various possibilities. Out of loathing for Trump? Out of institutional opposition to his promise of better relations—“cooperation”—with Russia? Or out of personal ambition? ...
What was President Obama’s role in any of this? Or to resort to the Watergate question: What did he know and when did he know it? And what did he do? The same questions would need to be asked about his White House aides and other appointees. Whatever the full answers, there is no doubt that Obama acted on the Russiagate allegations. He cited them for the sanctions he imposed on Russia in December 2016 ...
With all of this in mind, and assuming Trump knew most of it, did he really have any choice in firing FBI Director Comey, for which he is now unfairly being investigated by Mueller? ...
Listening almost daily to the legion of former US intel officers condemn Russiagate skeptics ever more loudly and persistently in the media, we may wonder if they are increasingly fearful it will become known that Russiagate was mostly Intelgate. For that we will need a new bipartisan Senate Church Committee of the 1970s, which investigated and exposed misdeeds by US intelligence agencies and which led to important reforms that are no longer the preventive measures against abuses of power they were intended to be. (Ideally, everyone involved would be granted amnesty for recent misdeeds, ending all talk of “jail time,” on the condition they now testify truthfully.) But such an inclusive investigation of Intelgate would require the support of Democratic members of Congress, which no longer seems possible.
Wow. The Democrats have lost The Nation.
Ouch.
PopeRatzo most upset.
I thought we already paid ISP's to build out, they just kept the money and cities/states kept quiet.
Something along the line of the 200 billion scandal
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/legac...
Stop pretending the President has plans beyond self-enrichment. He doesn't.
This chin-stroking, head-scratching credulity was tired a year ago.
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
Open ended hand outs and tax changes to big telco monopolies for networking did not get results in the past.
Same monopolies looked after their same paper insulted wireline networks.
How about the gov just allowing the private sector to build community broadband?
That would be a good change after all the past gov efforts trying to help with broadband.
Let gated communities, wealthy parts of a city, businesses work out their own networking.
Parts of the US with a plan can work together as a community and get their private sector networking done as they need to.
The plan is to rebuild infrastructure in America without just giving existing monopolies more cash to extended their paper insulated wireline again.
That did not result in better connections and held innovative parts of the USA back.
Now the gov is letting local communities build really great new networks as needed. No more NN rules to keep competition out.
Less of the past failed funding that saw support only for a few select telco monopolies.
Time to allow innovation and the private sector to try new networking methods and offer new services.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
You're elated while standing in a burning house shouting "I told you so!". Get a life you degenerate.
If even one Dem stood up and told them, only shovel ready.
Remember the 50 billion is over 10 years. For those who can't do the math that's 5 billion a year. That's peanuts. Comcast alone claims it will spend 10 billion a year on infrastructure (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/comcasts-network-investments-soared-with-net-neutrality-rules-in-place/).
Internet access is not the end-all of everything.
These are the five things included in "Infrastructure":
Transportation: roads, bridges, public transit, rail, airports, and maritime and inland waterway ports.
Broadband (and other high-speed data and communication conduits).
Water and Waste: drinking water, wastewater, storm water, land revitalization, and Brownfields.
Power and Electric: governmental generation, transmission, and distribution facilities.
Water Resources: flood risk management, water supply, and waterways.
I'm pretty sure Broadband is the least important of all of these. Also, Google and Verizon are already following out Fiber. It's only a matter of time before we have that.
We'll make great pets
How about his plan for the par-5 on the back-nine?
Wait, no, they knew exactly where they were moving to. They moved to a place with no internet. So forget those geniuses.
Eighty percent of the program's $50 billion would be "provided to the governor of each state." Governors would take the lead in deciding how the money would be spent in their states. The other 20 percent would pay for grants that could be used for any of the above project categories. Separately, broadband would be eligible for funding from a proposed $20 billion Transformative Projects Program, along with transportation, clean water, drinking water, energy, and commercial space. Trump's plan would also add rural broadband facilities to the list of eligible categories for Private Activity Bonds, which allow private projects to "benefit from the lower financing costs of tax-exempt municipal bonds." The plan would also let carriers install small cells and Wi-Fi attachments without going through the same environmental and historical preservation reviews required for large towers.
States get to decide how the bulk of the money is spent. Work with your state's government to make your voice heard. The rest of the money is available for grants for a wide range of shit.
This all sounds great to me. What's the problem?
No surprise really, Trump still uses an abacus and a slide rule.
Typical.
Now you know why no US bank will do business with him.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I don't see any citation for the $50 billion figure - which seems to be implied to be PER state. The proposed bill spends $200 billion total for all infrastructure, spread out over 10 years - so, $20 Billion a year for all 50 states - or $400 million a year per state. The articles seems to imply %80 of $50 Billion per state.
"The world is a construct of forceful imagination. Those who don't know walk around in the reailties of those who do"
I'll tell you what, I could care less about all of them....Schumer, Pelosi, Trump, Hillary, Bernie, etc. etc.
But one thing I can say for sure, my paycheck went way up, my health care's stabilized, and my investments....holy cow! My wife thinks I'm an investing genius, I'm up over 35% last year this time. While the media focuses on fake news, Russia, hating Trump and loving illegals I'm busy harvesting my bounty. Inflation, heck, it can go up 5% I don't care.
So guess what, I was a Democrat but I can say for sure I'm voting Republican straight down the line next Election Day and as long as it keeps up. And my kids are going to be able to vote in 2020, I'm sure they're going to do the same.
after repealing Net Neutrality there's so much broadband investment that the gov't doesn't have to chip in. Ajit Pai told me so himself.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
... to Trump in a serious way.
He can't be serious because the only lecture he ever gave was a confession.
Donald Trump On Tape: I Grab Women "By The Pussy”
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Honestly most of them were born somewhere without decent internet and can't imagine what it would be like to have it.
Donald Trump's grand plan for the internet is two dixie cups and some yarn.
Because the feds don't own the internet or the rights-of-way or the hardware or the software.
...nor should it? Providing broadband service is a legitimate federal government obligation....
Cities can provide it and many are. Counties can provide it and probably some are (haven't looked). Heck, even states can get together if they want to provide it. Why in the world would it be a Federal responsibility?
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
... and the Russians will pay for it
If Spectrum wants to get money for expanding broadband as they promised and legally obliged to do, they should take it out of the 10% taxes they levy for that purpose.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Good. Last time we gave billions to telecoms to 3xpand broadband, they did noth8ng and kept the money anyway.
IIRC, this is the second time in as many months where BeauHD has whined that dishonest pork-barrelling corporations aren't getting their snouts into the "rebuilding infrastructure in America" fund.
It sure sounds like it's trying to whip up outrage while implying political deception. As if letting the State decide how to allocate the funds is the same as not allocating any.