November 2008 Archives
Long ago and in a different war, I joined the military. It was part of our family's tradition of service to our country, and it was a responsibility I took seriously. Including qualifying as an expert marksman, even though it was not my job to carry a rifle.
I learned that on a military firing range, the expression "Maggie's Drawers" was used to indicate that you had completely missed the target.
The same term can be used to describe our approach to bringing broadband to all Americans. We have been so focused on phony issues and partisan finger-pointing that we have completely failed to even see where the real target lies.
Yet the data is consistent, clear and compelling. This nation, which once boasted a literacy rate of 99 percent, has seen that rate falling sharply. One in four high school students is a dropout before graduation -- one in three among black and hispanic kids. These kids will be forever consigned to low-income jobs and lives. And, the data says, low-income, low-education Americans don't use the Internet.
For some reason, we continue to pretend that the problem is a lack of infrastructure. Even though we can now get a broadband signal of some kind to more than 99 percent of all homes and businesses in America. Even though the cost of our broadband is below the world average. Even though we continue the amazingly rapid deployment of fiber and other advanced broadband technologies.
The truth is that we can't handle the truth. We'd rather bluster and blather about "competition" and "duopolies" and "network neutrality" than face the harsh reality that we are failing one-fourth of the American population with our bad policies and partisan bickering.
Already, the Congress is lining up to announce a new slew of bills to manipulate, regulate and complicate broadband in this country. Not one of those bills even mentions the critical issue of Digital Inclusion, or proposes a program to help people learn the literacy and computing skills they will need in the 21st Century.
Perhaps solving this very real problem is too difficult. Or perhaps it is not politically expedient. Or doesn't raise money and support for re-election.
But I have watched as we spent three years wrangling over the non-issue of "network neutrality." I have seen a decade of repeated efforts to force broadband's square peg into the round hole of 19th-Century telephony regulation. I have watched as greedy state treasurers lick their lips over the prospect of taxing Internet access, even though this would only make access less accessible to lower-income families.
In an industry obsessed with social networking, videos and making a fast buck, we've paid scant attention to the fact that most people who don't use the Internet are disinterested because there is nothing on the Internet they want or need. In an industry of rock stars and overnight sensations, we've left consumers waiting by the curb.
When it comes to solving the real and tangible and proven problems that confront us, or moving toward solutions that will actually make ubiquitous Internet use a reality, we've come up Maggie's Drawers. And until we start basing broadband and Internet policies on reality rather than political dogma and wishful thinking, we will only see our efforts continue to go astray.
President-elect Obama has been largely silent on who and what this new position of Chief Technology Officer for the government will be, but the basic idea is a good one.
Unlikely to be a cabinet-level post, the Federal CTO is also unlikely to be a policy-making position -- the federal government already has plenty of policy wonks within the Department of Commerce and the Federal Communications Commission, and there is little evidence that these are not sufficient to the task of setting policy and regulation. Where these are not enough, there are always the committees in the House and Senate to fill the gap.
Where the CTO would be a welcome addition to the Administration and to the Federal Government will be in four specific areas:
- Advancing the security of government technologies. The last decade has been an unending litany of failures and gaffes in this arena -- failing grades on cyber-security, lost laptops, security breaches, and more. Someone needs to bring a greater measure of consistency and security to the computer and telecommunications systems of the entire Federal government, and the CTO is a logical candidate for the job.
- Advancing the cause of eGovernment. President-elect Obama has correctly identified a problem in how information about our government is consistently and transparently communicated to Americans via the Internet. If you don't believe that, try using the FCC's search system to find a document on any subject at all. Try to find out from the Department of State how much liquor you can legally bring into the US from an overseas trip (answer: it depends...). Or find the hearing schedule for Congress on any given day (hint: skip the Congressional pages and go to C-Span's web site). The people deserve better than this, but it will take planning, commitment, and a steady CTO to achieve it.
- Bringing order to the government technology procurement system. Letting every agency choose what they want has left the government with a series of expensive, proprietary solutions that often don't work. From the new computer system for the FBI to the antique systems in the Treausry Department, there needs to be a better job of procurement policy and oversight throughout the government.
- FInally, assessing the technologies and issue technical guidance so those within the government who are not geeks by nature will have some idea what is out here in the real world and how it can be used. Keeping pace with evolving technology is a full-time job, and most servants of the people just don't have time to keep on top of it while still doing their full-time jobs. A CTO could help.
All that being said, neither the president nor the American people will be well-served if the person selected to become the government's CTO is simply another political hack with an agenda. If you want the position to be effective, it has to be clean. Or at least as clean as any federal appointment can be.
That automatically rules out just about any of the executives from Google, Microsoft, the major telecom companies, the major cable companies or Cisco Systems. Fortunately, there are still lots of excellent choices available from within the ranks of technology who won't come to Washington with an axe to grind or an agenda to push.
Personally, I would opt for someone who is a little skeptical of the current wars over Internet governance. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, for example. Or Declan McCullough over at CNet. Or even David Young at Verizon. None of these would want to take the job, which is another reason why they would be well suited for the task.
Whoever is chosen as the government's CTO, and whatever the final job description, I wish them Godspeed and good luck. It's a tough job that desperately needs doing.
