Obama's Goal: 98% of US Covered By 4G

alphadogg writes "Ninety-eight percent of US residents would have access to high-speed mobile broadband service within five years under a plan that President Barack Obama detailed Thursday. Obama's proposal, which he alluded to in his State of the Union speech last month, would free up 500MHz of wireless spectrum over a decade by offering to share spectrum auction proceeds with current spectrum holders, including television stations, that have unused airwaves. The cost of the proposal is likely to raise questions from lawmakers, and some backers of government broadband spending have already raised concerns that the plan would give money and spectrum to large mobile carriers."

Mobile... what about wired?

[thestudio_bob]

How about taking that money, building out the fattest/fastest fiber network you can and then turn around and let any carrier/company lease it to resell. I'm not sure why you are trying to make "mobile" broadband the thing to invest in, when wired broadband options suck just as much.

Re:Great for middle-class employed people.

[RazzleFrog]

Not necessarily true. Unless you are at the very bottom of society you still have a phone. For people in these areas they can replace their landlines with smartphones that also provide them with internet access they wouldn't otherwise have. The overall cost to have a smartphone vs having a landline, internet access and a home PC is far less.

Head over to India and go through the country-side. You will see cell towers everywhere and even goatherders with cell phones. Honestly when I was there I had better reception that some places in the suburbs of NY.

With schools no longer having text books

[rsilvergun]

This seems pretty critical. I don't know how my kid would do their homework without the Internet. And don't say, "Go to the library". That's fine if you can spend 4 hours researching, but the teacher's assignments are built around the idea that you've got a text book with all the answers in one chapter...

Re:Great for middle-class employed people.

[commodore6502]

But at what cost?

I've read the FCC's plan, and it would all-but-kill the Free TV that poor, unemployed, and ~50 million other americans currently rely upon (i.e. the FCC would sell-off the remaining channels). In exchange these people will be offered 4G internet plans that most cannot afford, and which cannot replace the television they lost, because of 5 GB caps.

From free to ~$600 a year. Not the kind of offer I would expect from a Democrat.