**DISSENTING STATEMENT OF**

**COMMISSIONER JONATHAN S. ADELSTEIN**

*Re: Inquiry Concerning the Deployment of Advanced Telecommunications
Capability to All Americans in a Reasonable and Timely Fashion, and
Possible Steps to Accelerate Such Deployment Pursuant to Section 706 of
the Telecommunications Act of 1996*, *GN Docket No. 07-45.*

In Section 706 of the 1996 Act, Congress wisely directed this Commission
to conduct regular inquiries into the status of broadband deployment.
Today, we take up the Commission's first report in four years on this
important topic. Given the ever-increasing importance of broadband to
our country's economy, public safety, education, and health care, I have
long argued that the Commission should engage in a comprehensive
analysis of broadband deployment, availability, affordability, and
competitiveness. Regrettably, this report, like its predecessor in 2004,
fails to set out an adequate basis for concluding that broadband is
being deployed in a reasonable and timely basis to *all* Americans,
which is our directive under the statute. Instead, this report repeats
past shortcomings, relies on faulty data, and fails to present a clear
picture of broadband in America.

Yes, more people have adopted broadband in recent years. But they have
adopted broadband faster in other countries with which we compete. Just
because a car speeds up doesn't mean it wins the race, especially if
other cars speed up faster. This report fails to admit that while we
have improved, other countries have improved at a faster rate, so we are
actually falling behind.

Since our 2004 report, it has become increasingly apparent that one of
America's central challenges is promoting the widespread deployment of
higher-bandwidth broadband facilities to carry the vast array of
innovative services that are transforming virtually every aspect of the
way we communicate, and to make sure that these facilities are
affordable for consumers. We stand at the forefront of a revolution in
the applications that will ride over this infrastructure. They are
reshaping the way we work, educate our children, provide health care to
our citizens, govern, practice democracy, and interact with one another.
These are tools that can play a crucial role in driving our economic
growth, enhancing public safety, and revitalizing our communities.

Even as consumers are increasingly empowered to use broadband in newer,
more creative ways, we are competing on a global stage. So, it is
troubling that the warning signs I raised four years ago now flash only
brighter. We face real challenges of availability, affordability, and
competition. Similarly, while I am glad that this report begins to
address broadband in an international context, it is too dismissive of
the considerable evidence suggesting that we are behind the global
leaders in broadband and have continued to fall.

The report unconvincingly attempts to dismiss the international
broadband penetration rankings. The fact is the U.S. has dropped
year-after-year. This downward trend and the lack of broadband value
illustrate the sobering point that when it comes to giving our citizens
affordable access to state-of the-art communications, the U.S. has
fallen behind its global competitors. We do not wrestle with the
question of broadband value, or price per megabit, for which our
citizens pay far more than those in many other countries. According to
the ITU, the digital opportunity afforded to U.S. citizens is not even
near the top, it is 21^st^ in the world. Recent OECD data show the U.S.
ranked 11^th^ in the world in price per megabit. Other reports show U.S.
consumers pay nearly twice as much as Japanese customers for connections
that are twenty times as slow. This is more than a public relations
problem, it's a major productivity problem.

Consumers, small businesses, and even government agencies are becoming
increasingly creative with broadband, as it becomes more widely
available. Indeed, we have made progress since 2004. The broadband data
released concurrently today highlights broadband growth, although these
statistics are based on our now defunct definitions. The significant
investment in the 700 MHz auction also illustrates the investment being
made in broadband facilities. Many providers are deeply committed to
their communities, our Schools and Libraries program continues to play a
vital role bringing broadband to our nation's children, and there are
positive lessons to draw on. Yet, this report fails to get at the core
question of whether *all Americans* are participating in the broadband
revolution and it again fails to present a meaningful analysis of
broadband availability, competition, or affordability. It largely relies
on the same old methodology for assessing broadband availability and
competition that has been recognized almost universally as flawed and
broken. Although I am genuinely pleased we also adopt a companion item
to improve our data gathering efforts, the truth is that we rest our
conclusions today on a far flimsier basis. Unfortunately, the failure
over the past eight years to address these data shortcomings --
particularly, in time for this report \-- seriously undermines the
credibility of its findings.

Nor does the report address meaningfully the *competitiveness* of the
broadband market. In the Notice initiating this proceeding, we also
launched an inquiry into the competitiveness of the broadband market
that we committed to do as part of our review of the major BOC-IXC
mergers in late 2005. Despite that commitment, a rigorous analysis of
the state of broadband competition is absent here.

Also gone from this report are attempts to analyze case studies or to
provide a compilation of best practices for providers and communities
looking to keep up with the fast pace of change. Good and instructive
stories abound, and I believe the Commission could have played an
important role in documenting these successes. Choosing representative
communities and initiatives is inherently difficult, but we lose an
opportunity to grapple with the real world challenges and achievements
in a way that could better inform policymakers and readers of this
report.

This report also fails to provide a clearer roadmap for achieving the
goal of delivering affordable, truly-high speed broadband to all
Americans. The report culls a list of FCC decisions since our last
report, some of which have been more effective than others. Yet, it does
not probe deeply into broadband challenges for those in rural areas,
those in Indian Country, those with disabilities, or those in lower
income areas. Nor do we grapple with the policy debates occurring in
other countries with whom we compete in the global marketplace. Past
reports have included recommendations and policy guidance. Although I
may not have agreed with all those recommendations, we miss a chance
here to provide guidance in this critical area.

It is increasingly apparent that an issue of this importance to the
economy and the success of our communities warrants a coherent,
cohesive, and comprehensive national strategy. The first step in
addressing this challenge is to collect better data about the state of
the marketplace and to perform a realistic assessment of our success and
failures. Only through such efforts can we truly assess our current
strengths and weaknesses and develop responsive solutions. Our companion
data gathering item provides hope for the future but, for the reasons
outlined above, I must dissent from this Report, which falls short of
those goals because it is based on the old, flawed data gathering
methodology.