Consider the tiny Indiana town of Scottsburg.
DSL and cable modems weren't available. Far from the fiber 29 miles away in Louisville, Ky., residences, businesses and other entities could pay up to $1,300 per month for a T1 connection through Verizon -- the only connection available in this town.
Faced with losing local jobs to a nearby city due to Scottsburg's lack of affordable high-speed Internet access, the mayor refused to wait for the cable and phone companies to get around to developing the service.
He worked with the municipal power company to provide wireless Internet service -- or Wi-Fi -- to the town's 6,000 residents, who now pay about $35 per month for the city-run wireless service.
Not only can small businesses and home-based companies afford broadband -- keeping needed jobs in town -- the school district also saves up to $6,000 per month in telecommunications costs. The school system had no choice but to pay that much for fast Internet connections for schools.
But with the city's municipal wireless network, schools have cut the cord, so to speak.
Scottsburg isn't alone. Dozens of cities and towns throughout the nation are developing their own wireless Internet networks to encourage economic growth, improve emergency police and fire communications, and close the digital divide that has left millions of Americans without Internet access.
Philadelphia is crafting a wireless plan based on residents' need for affordable access. Chaska, Minn., developed a broadband network that costs $16 per month and allows local police to communicate more effectively in the field.
St. Cloud, Fla., first deployed wireless access to draw people downtown, and because city leaders liked the results, they plan to expand free Internet access to the entire city by the end of the summer, rolling the low costs into the general budget.
Opposition Mounts
Unfortunately the giant telephone and cable companies have grown comfortable with their monopolylike status of providing high-speed Internet to customers over their lines, and are opposed to efforts by communities like these.
They'd prefer not to have competition from free or low-cost municipal providers -- competition that ultimately would improve Internet access to all Americans. Rather than working with communities to develop ways to expand low-cost Internet access, they've deployed lobbyists to work against them in state legislatures to pass laws stopping municipal Internet zones.
Such laws are shortsighted and ultimately will hurt America's ability to compete in the global marketplace. According to research from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and the Pew Internet & American Life Project, more than 40 percent of Americans still do not have dial-up Internet access at home, a staggering 80 percent don't have high-speed access and nearly one out of four Americans doesn't use the Internet at all.
As a result, millions of people fail to benefit from the increased standard of living the Internet brings. Job openings that are only advertised online are out of their reach. E-learning and telecommuting -- so vital to millions of stay-at-home parents -- are unavailable. Information on local and national politics -- so plentiful online in this past presidential election -- fails to reach a significant portion of the electorate.
These Americans are swept behind the technological revolution of the last 20 years, and their standard of living declines even further.
Those who lack home Internet access look different from the rest of the country. They are more likely to be minority, low-income, less educated, elderly, from a Southern rural community, unemployed or disabled, according to research by the Pew Internet and American Life Project.
Income appears to be the overriding factor in determining who gets the Internet. While more than 80 percent of households with incomes of more than $50,000 a year have home Internet access, less than half of families earning less than $30,000 a year do, a recent analysis by Consumers Union and the Consumer Federation of America discovered.
Supply and Demand
It's not surprising these Americans can't afford high-speed Internet access.
Cable companies charge, on average, $40 to $60 a month for Internet on top of already high cable TV rates, which have skyrocketed at almost three times the rate of inflation since 1996. Some cable TV and high-speed Internet monthly bills can top $150 or more.
High-speed access over phone lines also is costly. Phone giants such as Verizon, SBC and BellSouth claim they can't make money on their Internet access, despite charging customers $30 a month more for DSL on the same wire where customers already pay for local phone service.
The claim by the cable and telephone industries that municipal Internet service is unfair competition is insincere at best. Municipal entities have a right to provide their residents with the best services possible -- including the right to communicate effectively in our ever-changing world. Allowing more competitors in the Internet marketplace will only improve demand for the service -- not retard it.
In a recent Texas Legislature debate over Internet access providers, phone giant SBC wanted to block communities from delivering residential Internet service, arguing that their ban would still allow cities to provide access in community centers, schools and libraries.
Encouraging people to stop by the library to use the Internet is fine, but inadequate, since it's easy access that makes the Internet so crucial to modern life.
Imagine that same argument applying to your local library. Because libraries "compete" with bookstores, books couldn't be checked out. Instead, patrons could only read them when the library was open.
The Consumers Union, and more than 100 national and local public interest groups, communities and municipal power providers believe local communities have a right to build their own Internet networks, and offer citizens more telecom services at lower prices than the phone and cable companies are willing to provide.
Americans have too much at stake to leave Internet access to two industries that either don't offer service at all, or price it so high that they leave millions unable to afford it. Closing the digital divide in America is vital to ensuring individuals -- and the nation as a whole -- reap the benefits of a prosperous, Internet-based society.
Cities and towns are among the last lines of defense in the fight to improve low-cost broadband access to all.
