Senators Say The FCC’s New Maps Still Suck, Overstate Coverage

from the maps-to-nowhere dept

We’ve noted more than a few times that U.S. taxpayers have spent nearly $400 million on mapping U.S. broadband, yet the FCC still somehow routinely produces maps that greatly overstate broadband coverage, and greatly understate the obvious impact of monopolization and stunted broadband competition.

All U.S. broadband policy is then based on data that doesn’t reflect reality, and it shows.

The FCC’s original broadband maps cost around $350 million, and were blasted for years for hallucinating broadband coverage, speeds, and competitors. Those maps suffered from numerous methodical errors (like the FCC determining a census block “served” with broadband if ISPs claims they could service just one home in that block) that resulted in data that didn’t reflect reality.

After being mandated by Congress in 2020 by the Broadband DATA Act, the FCC struck a new, $44 million contract with a company named Costquest to develop a new map, just unveiled last November. I’ve been getting an earful from state broadband leaders about how these new maps still dramatically overstate coverage, rely on ISP claims of “advertised speeds,” and once again don’t reflect reality.

Senators hopeful to nab some of the massive $50+ billion in broadband subsidies made possible by the infrastructure bill aren’t particularly happy about it. Senators Jacky Rosen of Vermont and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada have written a letter to the FCC (hat tip, Ars Technica) stating concerns about the new maps:

“Despite a clear mandate from Congress, the draft maps are deeply flawed. As Senators representing Nevada, we are seriously concerned about the Nevada map’s accuracy and potential negative impacts on broadband infrastructure funding for our state,” wrote the lawmakers.

“These clear discrepancies may result in our state losing millions of dollars in federal funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that are critical to ensuring we are providing essential broadband service to Nevadans, as well as limiting the areas OSIT can invest federal dollars,” the lawmakers continued.

In Vermont, state officials say their own data indicates that a whopping 18.6 percent of state residents still lack access to any broadband whatsoever. The FCC’s new and updated broadband map claims that just 3 percent of state residents lack access to broadband, a huge disparity. You can’t fix what you can’t measure, and the FCC still can’t measure broadband gaps and muted competition.

For what it’s worth, the new maps demanded by Congress are an improvement. They rely more heavily on crowdsourced data, they discard the FCC’s flawed census block methodology, they require that the FCC is slightly more aggressive in terms of ensuring ISPs are providing accurate data, and they include a new system for third parties to challenge data that isn’t accurate.

But states tell me they find the challenge process to be a bit of a mess. Most states also say they aren’t going to be able to meet this month’s cut off challenge deadline before billions subsidies start flowing. They also say the system favors entrenched monopolies (with much fatter budgets and time to navigate bureaucracy), something the letter also rather vaguely hints at:

“In addition, our State Broadband Office has concerns with the current challenge process, through which states can challenge the draft maps, as it is based on assumptions that put the onus on consumers to proactively engage with providers, rather than practical access to high-speed internet for consumers or technological realities.”

It’s worth noting that the new maps, just like the old maps, also omit pricing data, despite the fact that affordability is the key obstacle to access, especially in marginalized communities.

Telecom giants have spent decades lobbying against better maps lest the press, public, and policymakers finally realized the sector has been broken by monopolists, resulting in somebody in power getting the crazy idea of actually trying to fix it.

All told, it’s absolutely wild that it’s 2023 and the U.S. government still can’t accurately tell you where broadband is or isn’t available after spending $400 million on the problem. That’s a direct reflection of our regulators, who, regardless of party, still somehow can’t even manage to publicly acknowledge that monopolization, and limited competition, is the root of the sector’s problems.

Filed Under: , , , , , ,
Companies: costquest

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Senators Say The FCC’s New Maps Still Suck, Overstate Coverage”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
13 Comments

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

My goodness, you truly have become the dumbest commenter here and that takes work.

The maps aren’t about “not letting the free market decide.” They’re the reverse. An attempt to show where there’s an actual free market, and where there’s monopolistic practices that limit the free market.

You’d know that if you didn’t have you head stuck up your ass.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Totally over his head that these subsidies are needed because the “free market” decided it wasn’t worth it to put broadband in these mostly rural areas.

Now I guess we could let these most likely conservatives not have access to broadband but then I don’t decide whether basic services should be provided based on how people in the affected area vote.

discussitlive (profile) says:

Re:

You could just let the free market decide. spend no government money on it at all. Wouldn’t that be nice?

Tell ya what; we can do that.
Remove all protectionist laws on the books for the monopoly broadband. Let’s get a REAL free market for broadband provisioning! I’d LOVE it. My community has had tons and tons of dark fiber built in, but due to monopoly protection laws it can’t be lit up or connected to anyone because the people that paid to put it in are not the incumbent telephone or cable company. Be nice to turn on two decades old infrastructure that right now isn’t doing a damn thing for anyone.

Anonymous Coward says:

public challenge process

I’m pretty sure this is a “dumb” idea, but what about making the whole “challenge” process something that your average joe could be a part of?

no, never mind, that would either be abused or completely useless.

Even it were somehow successful, I don’t think it would end up improving things… everywhere I’ve lived, you have one choice (I don’t count wireless as sufficient… at least not yet)

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...