Recently in the Telecommunications Category

   Whether we are talking about energy or telecommunications, so many commodities we use today scream out for a comprehensive policy that encourages growth and innovation.   With the growing importance the role of the internet plays in each of our lives, it is long since time for us to protect what is truly a national treasure. Whether in education, business, research, or in our personal lives - we depend upon it.   Innovation, competition and economic growth require it.  

   Just as so many Americans depend upon the transportation infrastructure, its reliability, frequency and speed - we too depend upon the internet.   With the rising costs of energy, more and more citizens will depend on public transportation to get to and from work, and with increasing need and speed.    With the increased global dependency on the internet for our business and personal lives, more and more citizens will depend on the speed and reliability of the internet.  And just as transportation must continually innovate and grow, so must the internet.

    So who should pay for it?  We all agree on its growing importance to this global economy.    So why should someone who only uses the internet occasionally for pleasure, pay the same rates as a business whose heavy and frequent use puts stresses and demands on the infrastrucure?   Why should heavy video streaming block cutting edge medical research?   The carriers continue to make heavy investments in the growth and reliability  and to manage the traffic flow, but we too must pay our fair share.   Why aren't there variable pricing levels for bandwidth use?   With the rapid expansion of internet traffic, now is the time to have a comprehensive policy that spurs growth.      

    Each year WIPP polls its members to get confirmation and reaffirm the issues that are most important to them, and to gain a sense of the priority of those issues.   For the first time, health care was out-ranked as the most pressing issue, by concern for the economy.

   Despite ranking the U.S. econonomy as the #1 issue, WIPP members are optimistic about their business prospects in 2008.   Over 82% do not expect to downsize their business, and 49% expect to add up to 5 new employees this year.

   The response from women entrepreneurs clearly reflects the growing concern with the U.S. economic outlook.   Given the key role that small business plays in our overall economy, the results of the survey helps shape federal and state policy that supports the continued health of WIPP's 500,000 members, and the millions of small business owners in the United States.

   Right behind the U.S. economy, as in past years, members ranked health care as their leading issue.   65% of the surveyed women business owners offer health insurance coverage to their employees.   While the majority oppose the federal government acting as the sole provider of healthcare coverage, our members were split on whether or not employers or individuals should be responsible for obtaining insurance for health care.   In 2007, 33% said individuals rather than employers should assume that responsibility.   This number has increased to 46% in 2008.

   When asked about possible solutions to address health care costs, 89% were supportive of proposals which would give small employers access to the same insurance offered to government employees.   Additionally, 62% of survey respondents supported lifting restrictions which prohibit business owners and employees to shop across state lines.

   Other issues that ranked as important or very important in the survey, included energy and the environment, access to capital, federal procurement programs and telecommunications issues.

   One of the items that surprised me - and pleased me so much - was the growth of the number of minority members in our organization.   According to the survey, 36% of our members responded as a member of a minority community:   African American, Hispanic, Asian, etc.    Diversity has been a top priority for WIPP.   We've been working hard to increase minority participation, and are making steady progress.   Thank you all for your confidence and faith in us.

   For more information on the survey, a detailed Executive Summary of the survey results, and our Top Ten WBO Facts, check out our website!

   Our cities and states follow our direction and use our taxes to build and maintain roads, and the police monitor traffic safety and flow and make sure that our roads are adequate and not clogged by huge traffic jams. This seems reasonable to me.  Traffic congestion just doesn't cut it.

    Is not the same thing true for Internet use?   I love using the Internet.   It has become such an important part of my life and my profession.   I use it a lot and I and my children and my grandchildren have benefited so much from it.  

    I want it to run smoothly, without outages or brownouts.   I want to be able to set some standards on what my children can see or not see on the web, and I want my customers to be able to access my products and services and place orders easily and quickly. I want some controls over it and I want responsible autorities to exercise reasonable controls over it - just like the police do. 

I'm still venting over the New York Times op ed written by Damian Kulash, Jr., "Beware the New New Thing" .  A few days ago I wrote a blog questioning why Damian should be a star witness for the House Judiciary Committee on net neutrality.   Here is a young man who is increasing his profit margin at our expense while making it more and more difficult for us to use the expansive resources and capabilities of the internet.   Is this "net neutrality"?   My blood is starting to boil again, just thinking about it.   If you haven't read my original blog yet, you can find it on our WIPP blog.

   I am not finished on this subject though.   Damian raises an interesting point on network management that I want to address.   While he and other bandwidth hogs are seizing and slowing  the internet for us mere mortals (without paying a single  penny extra for their excessive use), he is proudly taunting the managers of the networks for trying to make sure that it runs as smoothly and efficiently as possible so that we can a) get our email; b) log on and do our work when away from the office; c) do research and shop; d) communicate with friends and family; and e) watch his videos!   What is he thinking?   Is the net his and his alone?   Can he use it exclusively  to promote his videos to us leaving few and fewer resources available for us to use and enjoy the internet?

   Thank goodness there are network managers that are watching out for us!   Like our elected officials whose job  it is to make sure there are enough city and state roads and the police whose job it is to manage traffic flow so that we can all get home at a reasonable hour, network managers have the capability and responsibility of monitoring and adjusting traffic patterns so that we can ALL enjoy the internet.   What is Damian thinking when he says "We can't allow a system of gatekeepers to get built into the network?"   I'm sure he has HIS "gatekeepers"!

   I just read a very interesting op ed in the New York Times today, April 5th, 2008,  by Damian Kulash Jr, Beware of the New  New Thing.   I read it a couple of hours ago and I am still shaking my head in wonderment.   

    Actually he probably is still shaking his head in wonderment over having been asked by the House Judiciary Committee's antitrust task force to be the lead witness on a hearing on net neutrality.   Here is a young man who has made his fortune on the net.    His band's songs have been '...streamlined and downloaded hundreds of millions of times (orders of magnitude above...(his) CD sales.'   What an entrepreneur!   What a country!   He has found a way to increase his profits and exposure many  times over, by using the net to reach out to millions of fans and hasn't paid one penny for this privilege!!!.

    As an entrepreneur, I applaud that.    It's great.   He has found a way to sell his product at virtually no cost!  Isn't this what the internet is all about?  

   Well, yes and no.   I'm thrilled he is successful, but does it have to be at my expense - and at the expense of hundreds of thousands of other entrepreneurs who have valid products and services that they market and sell on line?  Does it have to be at the expense of millions of consumers and users  who have come to count on using the internet for research,  homework, exploring new and exciting worlds at an instant.   Don't we have the right to use the internet and expect the same speed and  service?

   The way he (and other bandwidth hogs) are using the net, is impacting our use of the internet - and as the use of videos increases it will put an ever increasing burden on the internet, and cause it to slow down and struggle with the load.  Videos use up a lot of space and resources.    He is making millions without paying for the cost to do business - and intruding on our space!   

   When I have a product to sell there are costs associated with it - and I have to pay them to get my product into the marketplace.   Those costs are figured into my sale price.   Damian has found a way to increase his profits with little to no cost of bringing his product to market.   Is that fair, I ask you?    If I have a product that I am marketing on line, and I am driving that product out to millions - I expect there to be a cost to do this business.  I want my product out there and I want it easily and rapidly  accessible to the public - so I am willing to pay a fair and reasonable rate to have it delivered quicklyand promptly. I am not willing to deliver my product to market at the expense of citizens for whom the net has become a very important resource in their lives, nor do I want it delivered by pony express.

     Damian Kulash - wake up!   It is not our responsibility to feed and clothe  you in the style you have so recently become accustomed to!   You have a responsibility to act decently and fairly - and pay your fair share!   

    And to the House Judiciary Committee - what are you thinking when you ask this person to be a star witness?