The unanswered, great digital divide, question regarding the difference between the two candidates is probably, "How much will universal service cost the American taxpayer". There seems to be little philosophical difference between the two positions when it comes to the noble objective. So, in spite of the rhetoric to keep federal taxation out of the Internet access arena, if indeed broadband is expanded using federal funding...those ARE my tax dollars and your tax dollars.
Presidential Politics and the Digital Divide
NewsMax.com ran an article yesterday with a relatively unbiased perspective on the Bush and Kerry campaign positions regarding Internet access. The article, Kerry on the Record: The Great ?Digital Divide?, written by Dave Eberhart attempts to describe the thin line that separates the positions of the two major candidates in the 2004 presidential race. First of all, let me make it clear that my position on the issue is that any sort of federal control over access to the Internet or any aspects of its functionality belongs in the private sector. If we really want to see technologies screwed up over the next couple of decades, then add federal bureaucracy to the business formula (end of Paul's sermon). Both candidates are pushing for universal service. Now what universal service means is a little ambiguous but appears that it involves the following features:Internet access that allows connectivity without federal taxation Distribution of broadband services in rural areas and low income area similar to what is available in major urban centers...and using federal resources (tax dollars) to do so Possibly allowing local electric companies (state and federally regulated) to become Internet providers, implying that local phone companies may have to compete with utility companies for Internet customers in under-served areas.
The unanswered, great digital divide, question regarding the difference between the two candidates is probably, "How much will universal service cost the American taxpayer". There seems to be little philosophical difference between the two positions when it comes to the noble objective. So, in spite of the rhetoric to keep federal taxation out of the Internet access arena, if indeed broadband is expanded using federal funding...those ARE my tax dollars and your tax dollars.
The unanswered, great digital divide, question regarding the difference between the two candidates is probably, "How much will universal service cost the American taxpayer". There seems to be little philosophical difference between the two positions when it comes to the noble objective. So, in spite of the rhetoric to keep federal taxation out of the Internet access arena, if indeed broadband is expanded using federal funding...those ARE my tax dollars and your tax dollars.