Policymakers need clear goals before making new rules

As the wireline industry's focus is divided between legal battles over unbundled network elements and comments regarding the future regulatory landscape for voice over IP, I'm reminded of a favorite adage from my youth:

"If you don't know where you're trying to go, you probably won't get there."

I'm not sure who told it to me or who is credited with saying it first (if no one claims it, it probably will be attributed to Yogi Berra), but the meaning is clear. There are rare instances of accidental good fortune, but it's generally hard to achieve a goal that's not identified. The corollary is that, without a clear goal, it's very easy to spin your wheels without making any real progress.

At the moment, I can't help but think telecom is mired in the latter scenario. While watching carriers pour untold amounts of resources into fighting the seemingly endless UNE legal war, my thoughts repeatedly are diverted by a nagging question: Will anybody be using the copper network by the time this is resolved?

Perhaps not, given the promising future of VoIP transported over broadband networks outlined in the myriad filings in the FCC's IP-services proceeding. But widespread VoIP adoption can happen only if most people have broadband access, which isn't the case today.

That reality quickly returns us to the debate about whether the goal of the nation's universal-service policy should be changed to make broadband connections the standard, instead of a copper wire--and whether those connections can be provided wirelessly in areas where it is cost-prohibitive to lay wires. And, if broadband connections are desired, should legacy copper networks continue to be subsidized in a manner that makes it tougher for other broadband providers to offer competitive alternatives?

With all the hoopla surrounding UNEs, VoIP, intercarrier compensation and other hot topics, these fundamental questions are getting remarkably little attention. And that's a shame, because the answers have a profound effect on all of these telecom policy debates.

There are a number of ways to achieve whatever goal is established. It may be that the current system is fine and should be left alone or only tweaked a little. Some will call for subsidizing broadband deployments in high-cost areas, while others will argue that completely deregulating the industry and letting free markets choose is the way to go.

Smarter people than me should decide the best method, but it seems clear that direction in this area is needed as quickly as possible. Otherwise, the FCC and Congress may be on the verge of embarking on a series of rulemaking activities during the next year that may have to be redone before the end of the decade--when technological advances will have made the current universal-service goals obsolete.

E-mail me at djackson@primediabusiness.com.