E-State Testimony

This Thursday, March 1, at 11AM I’ll be testifying before the Vermont House Commerce Committee at the State House in Montpelier on H.248, the bill that can make Vermont the first e-state in the nation.  I’m a volunteer advisor to Vermont Administration Secretary Mike Smith on this issue; but I’ve been invited to testify as a local expert – albeit one with a strong point of view.

It’s been a long time since I last testified under the gold dome topped with a statue of Ceres, the grain goddess.  I used to be a frequent visitor when I was Secretary of Transportation in Vermont way back in 1981 and 1982. Was talking about infrastructure then, too, but couldn’t use PowerPoint.  Not sure how much else has changed since then but do know that the legislature still functions with almost no staff (they have hired an consultant to help them on this issue, however).

Readers of Fractals of Change won’t be surprised by anything I say Thursday.

First point will be how critical it is that all Vermonters have the opportunity to get adequate and affordable broadband access very soon (by 2010 at the latest).  Satellite doesn’t count.  Basic DSL won’t be adequate for long.  Adequate access means upload as well as download speed.  Adequate access means roaming access as well as access at home or work.  And cell phones ought to work everywhere in the state.  I don’t think any of that’ll be a hard sell; the legislators I’ve already spoken to are both personally aware of the need and have heard from their constituents.

Second point: it’s appropriate for Vermont state government to be involved in building some of the infrastructure which will assure that this access is available everywhere in the State.  Major carriers and cable companies have cherry-picked Vermont as far as investing in modern plant here.  This has resulted in village and town cores with DSL and cable available (except in some parts of the State where even this hasn’t happened) and a donut of unserved residences around each village.  It’s difficult to start a business to serve just the sparsely-settled donut although some Vermont companies have managed to do so.  Assuring that everyone has access to technology which has gone from being a luxury to being a necessity is similar to government involvement in railroads, roads, rural power, and telephone line extension in previous generations.  It’s extremely important to make sure there is no minority left behind as society undergoes a technology tipping point.

Third:  it is appropriate to be bold. The Governor could have proposed a program in which Vermont just caught up with the rest of the nation faster than it is.  Instead, he proposed that we move quickly enough to take the lead and, despite being rural, be the first state with universal availability of access, the first e-state (see yesterday’s NYTimes article on lack of broadband in rural parts of rich Connecticut – hat tip to Brad Feld).  There are obviously sound economic development reasons for being first rather than an also ran. That goal should help in attracting the private capital which we believe will enhance the $40 million of bonding authority requested in H.248.   It’s also extremely important to those who are educated here.

Fourth:  a mix of building towers for radio and laying fiber where it’s needed is the best strategy for the speed of deployment we need and the most future-proof and the most appropriate use for money the State borrows.  Towers and backbone fiber have a long asset life.  Radios which go on towers and the other equipment which is and will be used to bring access the last mile to the home is changing rapidly and is a more appropriate investment for private operators and even towns and cities which may want to be in the last mile business. 

The State shouldn’t be in the business of picking technology winners or even determining what the last-mile business model will be.  H.248 enables the State to invest in basic infrastructure with a long payback.  Having this infrastructure in place should make it possible for multiple providers to meet last mile needs.  H.248, BTW, also makes it easier for Vermont towns to provide communications services and to finance them if that’s what they want to do. 

No telling what else I’ll say since I’m sure it’s still a good idea to speechify little and be prepared to answer questions.

Also testifying at some point to the committee will be other local experts including Tim Nulty of Burlington Telecom who’s done a great job bringing fiber to many businesses and residences in that city and will hopefully be able to do the same in other parts of the State.  Not sure when he’s on, though.

If you’re a Vermonter, you probably already know that hearings in the State House are open but it’s the legislators (appropriately) who get to ask the questions.  I’ll stick around for a while after the hearing, though, so feel free to ask me questions then or tell me what you think if you’re in town.

Comments on this post are welcome as well.  Special thanks to anyone who points out a hole in my logic or strengthens my points BEFORE Thursday.

Previous e-state posts:

Fractals of Change: Vermont, The First E-State

Fractals of Change: What’s an E-state?

Fractals of Change: More on Vermont, The First E-State

Fractals of Change: Vermont, The First E-State – First Reactions

Comments

[John Doty]

Tom:
Great article.
Several people from our group here in Westford/Underhill/Jericho will be testifying on Thursday at 9:00 regarding our project which we hope will bring Fiber Optic services to the three towns.
We have gotten tired of waiting for the governtment to help us out and decided to push off on our own.
From your post, it seems that we have been thinking the same thoughts although we do disagree a bit on the fiber/wireless link for the last mile. From our experience, wireless will not be able to provide much of the last mile link in Vermont due to our terrain and less than dense population (too few subscribers per repeater/tower to make it a viable business concern - although it will work well in town centers). We have been having a lot of difficulty in getting any wireless providers to be interested in serving our "remote" part of Chittenden county with any type of service. Most see the hills as too much of a problem to want to deal with.
What the lack of broadband really comes down to is the fact that there is no business case in the rural areas in Vermont and unfortunately government money won't necessesarily help that out. It reduces the cost of entry but does nothing to help bring in the revenue needed to sustain a viable business model especially on internet services alone.
Future proof is a great term that we have been using as well - we need to leap past what everyone else is doing to get the best that is out there because we certainly won't be near the top of the list for upgrades when the next great solution comes out. In fact, we will be right back where we are today talking about the same issues.
John

[Charlie Crystle]

We're trying to do the same for my county, and the wifi standard is one really big obstacle: knowing something is coming down the pike but is too expensive for us now, what do we do?

Also, is BPL coming along at all?

[Pete Cavender]

Tom,

Around 1990 I was telecommuting from VT to firms in the Boston area, and my phone bill was on the order of $700 from calling clients' modems. When IDSN became available, I thought the possibility of 64/128Kbps (even with the the cost of a long distance call) would be utiopia. The internet had not shown up on my radar yet, and ISDN looked like the new wave in data telecom; I got the first two ISDN lines in the state (except some the state governement had) as soon as they were avaialable. Well, besides the fact that they didn't even have ISDN available in Boston, and that Montpelier, where I lived, was an "island" for digital-to-digital calling, I felt Vermont, and I, were ahead of the wave, and glady paid ~$100/month for the two lines while I learned all I could about ISDN.

Years went on, and nothing imporoved with connectivity. I then heard that Bell Atlantic (or NYNEX or whoever they were at the time) was negotiating a new contract with the state - VTA-2. I was driving home one day when I heard some progressive activist type woman arguing that Vermont didn't need any newfangled telecom features - they only benefit telemarketers! What VT needs is cheaper basic dial-tone rates! I almost drove off the road.

The next day I walked into the Public Utilities comission office in Montpelier, and was able to sit and chat with the chairman for an hour. Ah, the beauties of living in the capital of a small state! I told him how the telco had bungled their ISDN deployment, while convincing the state regulators that we had state-of-the-art equipment (granted, when I moved to Waterbury VT in 1988 they still had a Strowger telephone switch). I ended up giving a lengthy deposition about my experiences and ideas to the then public advocate for the PUC, Atty. Richard Saudek. This resulted in me getting a rather nasty letter fron the telco's legal department, and not much else. The VTA-2 was ultimately defeated for other reasons, and I lost interest and cancelled my ISDN lines.

Ten years later in 2000, I was paying $50/month for an analog line used only for dial-up internet access via a local number, due to the per-minute local charges we were still saddled with - but the basic dialtone was rather inexpensive.

Vermont's regulators and progressive types seem to have always viewed improved telecom as a bourgeoisie luxury, and are happy to allow it to be expensive and only available in city and town centers - UNTIL it becomes common - and then - Oh My God! - We have to subsidize it and make it available to every oppressed woodchuck in the state! Think of the children! Schools need it for free!

Ugh. I am sad to say that this is just one of many experiences that, over 15 years, caused me to change my view of VT from that of Green utopia to Maoist dystopia.

Now Vermont will have to do something about the "donuts" you describe, which will cost more, and come later, than if they had demanded universal coverage from Adelphia or Verizon in the first place, in order to get their tariff. I tend to feel this is because the Vermont socilaist/Luddite types have no concept of the standard of living improving through Moores-Law type technological advances and market dynamics, but instead demand bread, circus and dial-tone subsidies. I bet the same woman I heard on the radio 17+ years ago is now clammoring for the government to "fix" this awful injustice.

Good luck in Montpelier. You obviously are the man they should talk to. I am curious what your specific suggestions will be. Keep us posted.

[Caoimhin Laochdha]

Tom,

The link to H.248 that appears in the above E-State post is non-functional.

Here is an alternative:
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/H-248.HTM

thanks
cl