Should the FCC intervene by penalizing broadband companies who refuse to provide service on Native American Reservations?

  • 18 years of Fraud and Waste.

    The incumbent companies had 18 years and $400 Billion to spend on the world they promised when the Telecommunications act of 1996 was passed and have yet to cover 1/4 of the population the answer would have to be yes. I can name the worst offender on the list: att (will not capitalize an effective monopoly) after purchasing SBC they promised fiber to every customer in the bellsouth area by the end of 2007 (never happened). Similar acts with sbc, pacific telesis, snet, ohio bell and most likely will break their promise after purchasing directv. This company took somewhere around $200 billion in overcharges and subsidies promises a Ferrari FF (FTTH) for every customer and delivers a Yugo (FTTPR: fiber to the press release). The second offender: verizon did the same thing and has published they are going to abandon their wireline services within 5 years.

  • Yes, they should.

    I think that nowadays the internet should be seen as a public utility. I know there are schools on reservations and those children would be enriched by having internet access at their schools. This seems very much like discrimination especially based on America's history with native american tribes. They should be given every opportunity for access.

  • Yes, I think its very wrong to deny anyone broadband.

    Yes, I think its very wrong to deny anyone broadband. I feel that companies should be open to servicing anyone who has the money. I don't understand why a company would deny a certain type of people this way. If the FCC can intervene then it should because its just plain wrong.

  • No, the FCC should not penalize broadband companies for the lack of Internet on Reservations.

    The issue of broadband access on Native American Reservations is the cost of building the infrastructure necessary to provide that broadband access. The per mile cost to install OC-16 exceeds $34,000 per mile. So companies would have to spend upwards of $100 million just to get service to the Reservation, with no way to recover those costs given the small populations they would serving. What needs to happen is for the federal government to step and subsidize those construction costs.

  • No they should not

    The reservations are a separate entity, and if they want to keep it that way then it's within a company's rights to offer or refuse service there. They even have a separate government, and have different rules about how they deal with their citizens, and I I'm pretty sure that some laws that are broken outside of the reservation, someone has to be "extradicted" to be held accountable to that.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.