[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 20]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 27887-27888]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    INTRODUCTION OF THE ``BROADBAND CENSUS OF AMERICA ACT OF 2007''

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY

                            of massachusetts

                    in the house of representatives

                        Monday, October 22, 2007

  Mr. MARKEY. Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the ``Broadband Census 
of America Act of 2007.'' The legislation introduced today reflects the 
version of the bill as approved by the House Subcommittee on 
Telecommunications and the Internet less than two weeks ago. The bill 
will continue to undergo refinement in the Energy and Commerce 
Committee and my ongoing goal is to work toward a bipartisan, consensus 
bill.
  The objectives of this bill are two-fold. First, to gain a better 
assessment of how America is doing in broadband service deployment and 
adoption, the bill will obtain information on the types and speed of 
broadband service subscribers utilize and the extent of such adoption 
for the residential and business market in areas at the 5-digit zip 
code level. Second, the bill will seek to develop a national, 
interactive map of broadband service availability for use by consumers. 
This map will help to identify areas of the country where service does 
not

[[Page 27888]]

exist and also assist consumers in ascertaining which broadband service 
providers are available in their neighborhood.
  I believe at this point there is growing consensus--if not 
unanimity--around the fact that current data collection methods used by 
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) are inadequate and highly 
flawed. Currently, the FCC counts a single broadband subscriber in a 5-
digit zip code as indicating the entire zip code has broadband 
availability, even if the sole subscriber is a business and not a 
residential consumer. This can lead to highly inaccurate and overly 
generous notions of actual broadband availability and use, particularly 
in rural areas where zip codes are quite large.
  In addition, under almost any set of measurements, the United States 
lags other nations not only in availability and speed but also in the 
value. The 50 Megabit per second service in Japan, for instance, is 
available to Japanese consumers for roughly $30. Here in the U.S., 
consumers typically pay $20 for about 1 Megabit of service and $30 to 
40 for roughly 4 Megabits of service. This legislation will task the 
FCC with identifying tiers of increasing data transmission speeds, for 
both upstream and downstream attributes. These tiers will describe 
existing broadband service capability deployed in the Nation and are 
designed to the extent possible to correspond to a service's ability to 
support qualitatively different applications and services. Identifying 
such tiers and the services which apply to them will enable 
policymakers to gauge the broadband service speeds that are being 
subscribed to by residential consumers and by small and large 
businesses and will also allow for trends to be seen in such adoption 
over a period of time.
  The lack of such information today leaves policymakers largely in the 
dark about the nature and extent of broadband service deployment and 
adoption in urban, suburban, and rural areas of the country. The state 
of knowledge around the status of broadband services in the United 
States directly affects the ability of policymakers to make sound 
decisions. For instance, the Federal government can do a much better 
job in reforming multi-billion dollar grant and subsidy programs--
whether at the Rural Utilities Service or at the FCC--if we have better 
data on where we truly need to target government assistance. Similarly, 
States can focus limited State resources for economic assistance, 
computer adoption, and broadband promotion if ample and accurate data 
is available indicating where such resources should be deployed.
  This is precisely what has happened in Kentucky. ConnectKentucky has 
been a wildly successful effort and has demonstrated the palpable 
benefits to mapping broadband for various public policy benefits.
  The risks of not developing national data will undermine our goal of 
achieving a national plan for universal, affordable broadband. This, in 
turn, adversely affects consumers and communities across the Nation. 
The benefits of higher speeds, lower prices, and more choices for 
broadband services include greater economic opportunity, job creation, 
worker productivity, access to health care and educational resources, 
promotion of innovation, and global competitiveness.
  Madam Speaker, I look forward to working with Energy and Commerce 
Committee Chairman John Dingell, Ranking Member Joe Barton, 
Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Ranking Member Fred 
Upton, as well as my other House colleagues on this bill as the process 
continues.

                          ____________________