More thoughts on the Universal Service Fund
Looks like my observations about the Universal Service Fund were picked up by DSL Reports, or at least a reader thereof.
In general, I am against corporate welfare, which is, in a sense, what the USF and many other government programs end up becoming. On the other hand, I am also for the proliferation of broadband. Anything that encourages the deployment of communication technology to all corners of our country is ultimately a good thing, which is one reason I am for (or at least don’t object as much to) the USF.
USF funds should be available to any company deploying any form of communications technology in an area where it is either economically infeasible to do so, usually due to sparse population. This goes for telephone companies, broadband providers, wireless companies, and any other kind of company deploying any kind of communication technology usable by the public at large.
I also agree with WhyADuck’s opinions on two points:
- Anyone getting USF funds should not be allowed to practice any form of network traffic filtering on customer connections or priorization of traffic for their own services.
- USF funds should only be given to companies for the portions of their service area that are sparely populated.