I don’t know how to handle this Political Science question and need guidance.
Throughout the readings and information provided, the digital divide and need for internet access is a common theme to promote digital equity. I think everyone understands the issues even better due to our experiences with the pandemic. Based on the readings and other current legislation at the state/federal level, what do you think could benefit a public organization or population of interest, your current organization, and/or your region. Why will or why will not the changes work. What would you suggest? This article asks the question – I changed the assignment so we are commenting on document. The tool is Hypothes.is and it is a collaborative annotation tool. Reference readings or other resources you find to make make your point. Referencing in this case can be referring to them like the Mueller article. Ask two questions and respond to two questions. Your responses should reflect what you think. This is an opportunity for dialogue and we can all learn from each other’s experiences and perspectives. This means, you need to make your first response early enough in the week for someone to respond to your post.
question 1- Do you think the federal government should be responsible for providing internet expansion? (There is no question they would have to fund it.) Later in this article it mentions how telecom lobbyists are slowing progress for federal standards on speeds and letting municipal broadband become a reality for all states. According to this article, the federal government is being swayed. They spend billions, but don’t allow a highly supported (3/4 Americans want municipal internet) and effective service (Chattanooga, Lafayette, Fort Collins) to become a reality. Why?
question 2- From the New America link here, it states that, “If consumers opt for professional installation, they pay an average one-time cost of $223.40 in the United States.” Perhaps the upfront cost of professional installations is part of the reason “broadband non-adopters continue to cite financial constraints as one of the most important reasons why they forgo these services” (Pew Research Center). Do you think the government or companies could lower these upfront costs? Does it really cost $220 to set someone up? Or is that pure profit?