Biden's New $1.2 Trillion Infrastructure Plan Includes $65 Billion for Universal Broadband (cnet.com) 131
CNET News: President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris on Thursday agreed to a $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure plan that includes building out high-speed universal broadband across the nation. The infrastructure framework will use two-thirds of the resources from Biden's proposed American Jobs Plan, and also includes clean transportation, clean water infrastructure, renewable energy infrastructure and climate change resilience. Under the plan, $65 billion will be invested in broadband for all. It proposes state and local investment in broadband infrastructure as well as using the proceeds from 5G spectrum auctions. It's a step backwards from the $2.25 trillion infrastructure plan previously proposed by Biden in March, which included $100 billion for broadband infrastructure. In March, Biden spoke about the digital divide, and how more than 30 million Americans have no access to broadband while those living in urban and suburban markets face broadband bills that are too expensive.
Paying Off Big Telecom ? (Score:1)
I wonder if Starlink will qualify.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You guys should get yourself some better political parties.
(Ha ha, just kidding. Of course you won't).
Re: (Score:1)
Funneling taxpayers money to massively profitable corporations is bi-partisan, and always has been.
Oh of course, it just happens to be the Democrats in power now so they shall get most of graft. That's why we are allowed to shift between parties after several years have passed, to pass the graft around more evenly between the two barley distinct entities.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It is, but it's slightly better than our recent experiment with letting a "business leader" run things themselves.
Of course, it didn't help that the one that was chosen was both incompetent and highly narcissistic.
Re: (Score:2)
It is, but it's slightly better than our recent experiment with letting a "business leader" run things themselves.
Curious how it is any way better.
The only thing Trump showed is that there is no possibility of change from either party, and that they are in fact the same party. The Democrats and Republicans fought against Trump, who was actually different.
You are buying into the artificial media party war meant to keep you distracted. Unless you wake up you are going to be super fucked in the next several
Re: (Score:3)
The Democrats and Republicans fought against Trump, who was actually different.
Yes, the Republicans fought against Trump, by refusing to convict on either impeachment, refusing to criticize him, agreeing with all of his ludicrous lies, passing almost all bills he wanted...
With enemies like those, who needs friends?
There are few statements as moronic as "Democrats and Republicans are identical". It's easy to disagree with or dislike both major parties, but that doesn't make them identical unless you're blind.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I know you don't have that option, but democracies do.
Re:Paying Off Big Telecom ? (Score:4, Insightful)
400 billion worth of already paid for failed fiber to the home is well documented, yet oddly ignored in politics. https://newnetworks.com/bookof... [newnetworks.com]
I agree with the previous poster that this is indeed a payoff to telecom. When big telecom beat back the telco reform act of 1996 under Bush Jr, it was the death of thousands of small ISPs and a reason why the US internet costs are far higher than much of the world (We're 28th). The big guys have never been held accountable to the hundreds of billions already given to them for universal broadband and at this rate never will be. However corporate welfare and constant handing over of money will continue. I would not be surprised if some of the old Ma Bell companies selling off their landlines was because of those broken contracts.
I'm in Michigan and a rural electric co-op was able to put fiber to the home to all their customers through TARP funds. 1 gig speeds to rural farm houses is rather nice yet I don't see how bailing out the banks ended up allowing universal connectivity. As they are handing out even more money at least they should use new players like the electric co-op, not someone who has already failed numerous times.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Probably, but not until it's actually providing service to the areas in question. I live in a rural area of the Southeast, and there is no broadband to the farm I live on and Starlink does not offer service around here. Their website says that they will someday, but not now.
At the moment, I have to use a cellular service that gives me about 3-8 MB of bandwidth and a hard 200 gb datacap for $300/month, and that is the ONLY thing available to me. I'm only about 20 miles from a major research university but
Re: (Score:2)
The first shell of satellites are all in orbit, but many are still slowly moving into their operational orbit (much higher than their initial launch orbit). Sometime this fall, they should be good to roll out a lot more service. They'll also need a much more expansive license for the ground stations from the FCC, but I doubt that will be a problem.
They've taken a break in Starlink launches since completing the first shell. I think the next series of launches will be in a polar orbit for better coverage i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does geostationary satellite Internet service (such as Viasat) work in the same circumstance?
Re: (Score:2)
There are 19 million Americans in the same situation as mine. This is the infrastructure we need to build.
Unfortunately the other 190 million voters (or how many it might be) think that you are an poor asshole and deserve to have no fast internet.
Meanwhile in old Germany there is a roll out program for fibre (because 30 years ago, telecom minister Schwarzschilling put everything into ISDN/DSL because his wife was the main share holder in a big German copper smelting facility - and no one really objected or
We need Fiber-optic Internet to all neighborhoods. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Internet Outage? Handled like electricity, water. (Score:2)
When was the last time you had an electricity or water outage?
Overall government management (Score:2)
That's my understanding. I will our city manager for details.
Re: (Score:1)
Water and electricity are indeed managed by government at various levels. Here in NY they are managed by the State Public Utilities Commission,. Other states have similar structures (not sure about Texas though).
TV, Radio, and Telcos are all under the FCC by the authority granted to the FCC by Congress in 1934, and amended in 1996.
What has been going on for decades is a form of corruption known as "regulatory capture" in which incumbent operators try to pay off or compromise the regulating bodies or authori
Re: (Score:2)
The one who owns the cables, does not need to be the one who runs them.
Perhaps you should look into other countries and figure how they are doing it :P
Hint: it is less retarded then USA, that is why it is basically every were on the planet much much cheaper to have fast internet: be it fibre or G4/G5.
Re: (Score:2)
And let's not overlook the existing issue where municipal governments lack the resources to maintain a reasonable security posture regarding what they already have, so what do you think will happen when they have so much more to deal with?
Besides, paying for something with tax dollars doesn't mean it's cheaper, just that you can'
Re:We need Fiber-optic Internet to all neighborhoo (Score:5, Insightful)
It's that the government make everyone ELSE pay for it.
No, the plan is that the government make EVERYONE pay for it, since it benefits everyone.
And as an added bonus, the government makes everyone pay for it according to their ability to pay. Those who have a lot pay a lot, those who have nothing pay nothing.
Fool me twice (Score:2)
> No, the plan is that the government make EVERYONE pay for it, since it benefits everyone.
Wait, didn't they just take the money and give us no actual broadband or nonsense that technically met the poorly written requirements the last time we tried something like this under Bill Clinton?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The plan.
They recent change of mind. Hmm. They haven't changed, what has changed.
So broadband everywhere, cheap cameras and microphones everywhere and AI to monitor it all now.
Cheapest way to handle a convicted criminal, demand they stay in monitoring range audi visual monitored by an AI and a neck mounted shock collar. Not prison required, you are all in prison. Well the nobodies.
Re: (Score:2)
Cited examples of all the ways existing past, paid for, contracts for fiber to the home have been broken. There should be hearings on where the 400 billion+ has went and why we need more. Of course there hasn't been, and there won't be. Letters to local reps don't matter when at least my rep is very well funded by large telco.
Re: (Score:2)
Now you can send (directly) videos to you aunt at high speed.
Re: We need Fiber-optic Internet to all neighborho (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Does he complain about paying for roads he doesn't personally use?
He would, if he bothered to think about it.
That's a pretty big if, though.
Re: (Score:2)
And while you're at it, give people who don't drive a break on the tax money that goes to pay for highways. But that's not *your* plan, is it?
Re: (Score:2)
You already know what they are going to say. They are going to bring up gas taxes and vehicle registration tax. What I want is a refund for my share of the bombs we dropped in the middle east.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd gladly pay for it, as would most people in my city, the vast majority of whom voted last year to grant our municipal utility company the authority to set up its own broadband service.
I just looked back through some old emails, and here's what I found:
2011: $18/month
2021: $104/month
Unchanged: I ask for the cheapest broadband plan they offer with unlimited data.
Changed: A decade ago, we had two ISPs offering broadband in my city. Today, we have one.
And that's why I'm paying 563% more today than I was a de
Re: (Score:3)
It's one thing when "the state" is a group of people in wood-paneled halls, thousands of miles away, who've never heard of you, your city, or your concerns. It's another thing when "the state" is Joe and Sarah, your neighbors, who are calling the shots for utility policies and practices from a town hall that you could walk to in a few minutes. Especially so when they've already been doing great for decades with all of your other utilities like electricity, water, trash, and sewage.
Re: (Score:3)
Last mile internet is required to participate in society, and providing it is a natural monopoly. So yea, I want everyone to pay for everyone else. My internet is more valuable if you have internet. Yours is more valuable if I have it. The reason why the government granted local monopolies is because last-mile internet requires using the public right of way. The only feasible alternative to government granted local monopolies is a public utility, which you appear to be arguing against. If residential
Re: (Score:3)
US Government-granted local monopolies
I think we've all had this conversation before during the great Title II debate and the reason why it's important to highlight the difference has been noted elsewhere, but just for fun. Local monopolies are granted usually by State or municipal authorities, not the US Government. Therefore, if your State has a vested interest to keep a particular ISP "making jobs" in your State, it gets a bit harder to get those monopolies to shake out. Kinda the same reason the Cuyahoga River was so polluted (among othe
Prediction (Score:5, Insightful)
I betting that this will turn out to be another stall tactic by the Republicans -- negotiating in bad faith, like with the ACA -- and that an insufficient number of Republicans will actually vote for it in the Senate for it to pass. The goal of the Republican Party is to impede the Biden/Democrat goals and agendas with the hope of winning back control of the Senate and possibly House in 2022, then using that control to win the Presidency in 2024. As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has said, "one-hundred percent of our focus is on stopping this new administration."
Re: (Score:1)
From your lips to God's ears, as the saying goes. The last thing we need is a larger federal government. Honestly, I can't believe people still want to give these pols even more money after their utter failures during the pandemic. Heck, they may have even funded the virus!
If you give more money to these people you are ENCOURAGING more of the same.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
You want me to vote to give California even more control over my life? Are you insane?
Re: (Score:3)
This is corporate welfare and crony capitalism; it's big government combined with big business.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't know how the money will be spent and managed. It doesn't have to be completely unregulated like much of the Trump money was. You can set up rules so it's paid for rural expansion and connected to actual expansion... They'll lie of course and do the minimum for the max claimed cost and it'll take local state officials years to catch the fraud and fine them a tiny amount -- that is if your under powered local officials even bother to investigate! Mine has in the past and catches ISPs at fraud it
Re: (Score:2)
Why bother? If you can make a successful enough corporation, you can just buy your own politician(s). Then you don't have to be public facing, that's what the politician is for.
Re:Prediction (Score:5, Informative)
Don’t know why this is modded troll. Mitch Mcconnell has been saying for years his only goal is to block progressive legislation. https://thehill.com/homenews/s... [thehill.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Don’t know why this is modded troll. Mitch Mcconnell has been saying for years his only goal is to block progressive legislation. https://thehill.com/homenews/s... [thehill.com]
Because this is /. and some people have trouble handling The Truth.
To be fair, mods like that often get reversed later by more level-headed people.
Re: (Score:2)
Preventing bad changes from taking place is what Conservatives do. They preserve rules and principals that are moral and functional - "know
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn’t putting money into fixing infrastructure create jobs?
Re: (Score:2)
But it depends. It could be spent in ways that creates jobs, or it could be spent in ways that simply keep municipal employees busy.
Re: (Score:2)
Comcast had a big republican bias in the past; I doubt they really switched much. not that corps don't give some to both sides; but comcast was big on republicans for a long time.
It comes down to HOW to manage that money. If you just hand it to them as tax brakes like republicans love to do -- they don't do shit. Quite often the dems will get the money passed but the compromise is to manage it in the republican way. tax credits are a common fuck up republicans love; and some dems like them too. Often the
Re: (Score:2)
This is supposed to be an infrastructure bill. Physical infrastructure like roads, bridges and rails. Not a renewable energy bill, not a broadband bill, not a healthcare bill; a god damned roads and bridges bill. We're already way in
Re: (Score:2)
No wonder that your country is turning more and more into a third world country, or even less, when its citizens don't even consider affordable internet an infrastructrue.
Hint: we are still in the middle of a pandemic.
Hint: people want to work from home in future.
Re: (Score:2)
I betting that this will turn out to be another stall tactic by the Republicans -- negotiating in bad faith, like with the ACA -- and that an insufficient number of Republicans will actually vote for it in the Senate for it to pass.
Biden has addressed this criticism directly. [whitehouse.gov]
Feh (Score:1)
More money down the hole. Change this, don't retry the same old mo' money scheme.
Re: (Score:2)
More money down the hole. Change this, don't retry the same old mo' money scheme.
What exactly makes you think those that pocketed the money and got rich last time, aren't the same ones who will pocket the money and get rich this time?
Wake up.
Re: Feh (Score:2)
Making my point. Thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Making my point. Thanks.
You're the one under the illusion that "change this" will do anything.
Neither one of us has the ability to do fuck-all about this problem, so why even complain? Not even your "Representative" gives a shit about this corruption.
Re: Feh (Score:2)
As you read, I sure don't think money is the answer to making broadband 'universal'. That's been tried. So stop with the money.
Your turn.
Re: (Score:2)
As you read, I sure don't think money is the answer to making broadband 'universal'. That's been tried. So stop with the money.
Your turn.
The Disease of Greed, has plagued mankind for thousands of years. It will likely be our species demise.
21st Century Digital Greed, is no different.
Either solve for the Disease of Greed, or set your expectations.
Re: (Score:2)
As you read, I sure don't think money is the answer to making broadband 'universal'. That's been tried. So stop with the money.
The answer is pretty simple. Just build it. Ooops, that was so easy again.
numbers, bzzzzz (Score:2)
Sure the number is a number that is easy for a reporter to copy-paste into a headline. Great, some millions or billions or trillions of dollars.
So. The actual question, how does this bill improve accountability so that recipients of this money will actually do what we are paying them for?
It's also about 1/5th what was proposed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It won't take decades to build a large water desalination plant.
Won't take decades to build the gas power plants to power them either. If you like golf, don't retire to Arizona, how hard is that?
Biden already killed this bill (Score:2, Interesting)
He announced that he won't sign it unless the Green New Deal is also passed alongside it. Zero chance of that happening.
Biden: "I demand all or nothing"
Repubicans: "Offer accepted. You get nothing"
Re: (Score:2)
When did he announce that?
Are you sure that wasn't just some right wing talking head's fantasy of why the Republicans should block infrastructure?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Today? Straight from NPR: [npr.org]
The president made clear that just because he was willing to compromise on the infrastructure deal, it should not signal to Republicans that Democrats will not move ahead on progressive priorities without bipartisan support.
"I'm prepared to do whatever needs to get done to move the country forward," he said.
And referring to the infrastructure package, he said: "If this is the only thing that comes to me, I'm not signing it. It's in tandem."
Right there.
It's dead, because there are enough Democrats in the Senate who don't want to push the insane progressive agenda of some part of the Democratic Party. It'll never pass the Senate, even if it were to come to a vote, which will also never happen.
President Trump knew how to make deals to get things done and could make deals with Democrats. The current senile coot inhabiting the White House? Well, let's just say that on a good day, he can remember which one is his wife and
Re:Biden already killed this bill (Score:4, Insightful)
So basically nothing you said was true. Biden said he was looking to compromise on this and future bills, nothing about the Green New Deal. Biden won the election with a large majority, it should come as no surprise that he wants to push forward the popular items in his agenda
But I guess you can't expect very good logic from someone conned into believing Trump is a good negotiator. Trump was so bad at negotiating, he was actually able to get less money for a border wall than the Democrats originally offered.
Re: (Score:1)
Democrats can't even negotiate with themselves.
You know who's going to torpedo this entire thing? Democrats in the Senate.
All I know is that things were better under President Trump than they have been so far under Biden. President Trump was able to get COVID stimulus done. Democrats devolved into failing to come to an agreement with themselves and provided a useless watered-down package that has only really succeeded in keeping businesses closed as no one is willing to work.
Re: (Score:2)
You know who's going to torpedo this entire thing? Democrats in the Senate.
In related news, popcorn sales are up.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the unnecessary trade wars were great under Trump. You might be happy to hear that Biden also got COVID stimulus done. It happened because it was a pretty bipartisan issue. If you look at anything more complicated like one of Trump's campaign promises of healthcare - total disaster.
The Democrats represent a larger portion of the center and left of the US so they have a much harder time than the Republicans who just block anything no matter how popular it is
Re: (Score:2)
Trump also got COVID stimulus done. Then Democrats dragged their feet on a second round as a campaign strategy. Since January, we haven't actually needed more stimulus, Biden just wanted to buy some support at the cost of
Re: (Score:2)
Being "tough in negotiations" only works if you have an end goal, but we got nothing out of it. Trump got us out of some deals, but his inability to make new ones shows what a fraud he is. Case and point - his biggest achievement you point out is that he managed to get a stimulus bill passed DURING a pandemic. What could be easier than that?
Voting ID is popular, so is early voting, automatic registration, more polling places. Democrats want more people to vote, GOP wants fewer. GOP is worried about vir
Re: (Score:2)
Most of this "Human Infrastructure" bill they want to sign in tandem is literally the Green New Deal. It's cost are somewhere in the ballpark of $6 trillion. They want free day care, free community college, expansion of medicare down to 60 and the list goes on. It's basically everything they want done "this time". Next time they'll want the government to start socializing more and more "essential" industries.
No way the Republicans will go for and as _xeno_ pointed out, there are even a few Democrats that wi
Re: (Score:3)
You make it seem like it's a bad thing to achieve the bare minimum that all other first world countries (and even many third world countries) have.
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose I've seen government spend money time and time again but the problems still persist. It's like giving money to ISPs to build out the Internet. We've paid for that at least twice already and yet it is still a problem. Nothing was ever done about it not getting finished either.
Last thing I really want to see is even more inflation to the dollar. All that money will likely go to enriching people already doing well then truly fixing the serious problems we actually have.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but you know: most third world countries (those don't exist anymore since decades anyway), have no carriers. I don't mean "NO CARRIER", I mean no carriers. Somehow that is something americans are super proud about.
Re: (Score:2)
Biden said he was looking to compromise on this and future bills
Go back and read what he actually said. He said he would only sign both bills together, and the second bill had to be the $6 Trillion "Green New Deal that isn't the Green New Deal". So there is no deal on the infrastructure bill, everything is still on the table.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, but you realize it's not at all like the "Green New Deal" that was released, right? He was talking about a bill that includes popular items like child care and power infrastructure. Is everything related to sustainability just "Green New Deal" now for the right?
Re: (Score:2)
And I just heard him say that while he accepts the bi-partisan bill, he's hoping that Democrats can rewrite it in reconciliation so they don't actually have to compromise.
Re: (Score:2)
Well obviously there was getting COVID under control, but that was kind of an obvious one for anyone but Trump. Then there's voting rights, expanding broadband, expanding education, improving healthcare.
All of these he campaigned for, and all are extremely popular across the country, but they weren't very interesting so there wasn't much media coverage of it.
Re: (Score:2)
“Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart —you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you’re a conservative Republican they try—oh, d
Re: (Score:2)
Just a thought -
If you want to point out how the Dems are screwing things up and doing stupid things, and unable to even come to an agreement with each other, that's cool. That can be useful information.
If you gratuitously include some "some was bipartisan and so great" stuff there, that makes it so people won't hear/believe your message unless they are *also* willing to believe that Trump is great. A lot of people aren't going to believe that, so including the Trump stuff just makes your message less effe
Typo (Score:2)
That was supposed to be:
If you gratuitously include some "TRUMP was bipartisan and so great" stuff there, that makes it so people won't hear/believe your message unless they are *also* willing to believe that Trump is great.
If you want to point out AOC once again saying something incredibly stupid, just do that. No need to add "Trump is bipartisan and smart and the greatest deal maker" in there. That just makes 55% of the readers stop reading what you wrote.
Re: (Score:2)
NO, inflation is not hitting hard. I don't think facts are worth the effort, you'll believe whatever and find a way to rationalize it when todays "inflation" proves to not be inflation but the demand spike and restarting of a post-covid economy.
Re: (Score:2)
when todays "inflation" proves to not be inflation
As of today it looks like inflation. No reason to doubt that it is indeed inflation.
Re: (Score:2)
Wood prices have been already coming down.
There is always some inflation; that is the system we have, but since the officials who create it do not have to report it honestly (especially the last 15 years) you can't really know. Just assume it's higher than any investments that do not beat the DOW. If you look it up you'll see the DOW tracks with actual inflation over time and that it really hasn't gone up. It's always hitting new record highs but adjusted it's basically flat long term; if it is not, then
Do the numbers. That's crazy. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Especially since a company like Starlink can solve the rural broadband issue in a year. Assuming they don't have to compete with the government to do it.
Any money for nuclear power? (Score:3)
The people that are ready to build the nuclear power plants aren't asking for money, they are asking for permission. Even so there needs to be money in the bill to pay for the people that issue the permits, perform the inspections, and build the government facilities for waste disposal. Because any large civil project costs a lot of money it's rare for a private bank to be able to issue a loan so the government steps in as the lender or as a guarantee on the loan, and that needs to be on the budget.
Such loans guarantees were given to solar power in the past, why not more for nuclear too?
https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
There is no path to zero carbon emissions without nuclear power. If there's no money for nuclear power, but money to burn in the solar power dumpster fire, then these are not serious people. Serious people look to solve problems. Unserious people want to look like they are solving problems so they can recycle the same fears for their next election campaign.
Sure it does. (Score:1)
What the 65B is REALLY going to do is pad a bunch of executive bonuses...
Re: (Score:2)
orly? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
universal broadband = free money (Score:2)
Universal broadband is just another name for giving free money to the "poor."
Re: (Score:2)
Universal broadband is just another name for giving free money to the "poor." ... ta, ta, ta, ta: for the rich, too!
Strange that people with so stupid arguments always forget that universal means it is for everyone. The poor, the lower class, the middle calls and
Re: (Score:2)
I will note that President Trump was able to make deals with Democrats, but Democrats are incapable of the same. Maybe replacing the author of the Art of the Deal with a senile old coot who likes to get a little too touchy with women wasn't the best of ideas.
*cough* Obama *cough*
Re:Bipartisan or "bipartisan"? (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe replacing the author of the Art of the Deal with a senile old coot...
I never realized that Tony Schwartz was president. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)