Economists dueled Fri. over the govt. need to stimulate broadband...

broadband policy” to address what he said is incontrovertibly a lag in broadband deployment in the U.S. The OECD broadband rankings’ validity can be debated, but the key fact is that year ago the U.S. stood higher in those rankings and has slipped, he said at the ITIF-sponsored debate. “We need a proactive policy” on both supply and demand, said Atkinson: “The OECD numbers show we can do better.” But the Progress & Freedom Foundation’s Scott Wallsten said facts are scarce when it comes to justifying concern about U.S. rankings or to decide if a national policy is needed. OECD data are unreliable owing to inconsistent collection methods, he said. The count doesn’t include large categories like colleges and universities, Wallsten said: “The key is to identify what market failure there is.” Asked by a listener if society’s responsibilities vary in line with whether broadband is seen as a “fundamental need,” like a utility, or a consumer product, like an iPod, Wallsten said “broadband sure isn’t [a utility like] water.” Atkinson said he comes down “in the middle, slightly toward the water side.” Wallsten warned that some wanted to make ISDN national policy and now many don’t even know what ISDN is, except that it’s a slow technology. Atkinson said he wasn’t advocating a policy based on a specific technology like ISDN but rather a wider- scope broadband policy. The economists agreed on one thing: Any subsidies should be from “general funds,” not the USF. “There’s an enormous amount of inefficiency in USF support,” Atkinson said. “The USF is growing out of control,” said Wallsten. “Don’t go down that road again.”