Rural America Dialed Out

What will it take to get broadband to the farmland? Service providers aren't interested in serving rural areas because the return on investment is too low. The FCC seems reluctant to regulate guaranteed access to these areas. The communities themselves are often too poor to finance deployment on their own. However, communications infrastructure, as Last Mile has often reported, is a major catalyst for economic development. Yet, those most in need are  most ignored.

For lack of better service, rural Americans are forced to pay exorbitant access fees for barely serviceable Internet or deal with geriatrically slow dial-up, reports Computer World. That article reports that 21 percent of the U.S. population live in rural areas.

Rural areas need broadband. But deregulation has freed carriers from any real obligation to offer it. The market will never provide universal broadband access without regulation or subsidies, but the U.S. lacks both a coherent policy and the political will to address the issue. Even as the telephony infrastructure itself is absorbed into the Internet, some policy-makers still fail to view broadband as the new critical infrastructure.

The only real alternative seems to be that these communities take it upon themselves to acquire broadband. Many rural communities don't have the population size, and thus the tax base, to fund broadband deployment. A more regional approach would be necessary, perhaps several contiguous communities pooling resources for a network build-out.

A better approach may be state-funded initiatives. Ohio and Arkansas are among a few states investigating how to get broadband to all its citizens. Kentucky serves as example for such states seeking state-wide connectivity. Since 2004, broadband access has improved by 50 percent with 94 percent of Kentuckians now connected. The state expects to reach 100 percent by the end of the year.

Another possible solution is the 700 MHz band that the FCC will auction after TV vacates the spectrum in 2009. The band is expected to be used for wireless broadband access as the spectrum is able to travel farther distances and penetrate buildings better than other current bands used for wireless. But do rural Americans have to wait another two years to get online? And when a wireless provider takes command of the spectrum, will the company provide true broadband to all communities? That remains to be seen.

As it stands, rural areas get the cold shoulder and miss out on economic opportunities. That just seems un-American.

If you've had experience in rural broadband initiatives or have any suggestions, please comment below.