Clinton Administration

The first part of the morning session was devoted to the government's vision of the NII--determining what regulatory change is needed and the government's role in building the NII. There was remarkable harmony and agreement in the basics. Government must drop regulatory barriers to competition and, while playing a leadership role, get out of the way and allow the private sector to invest in and build the NII. The difficulty is in the transition--how to provide affordable and diverse services while removing these barriers.

Michael Nelson, senior policy analyst in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, defined the NII as "a system to deliver to all Americans the information they need when they want it and where they want it at an affordable price." He also stated that the NII should deliver this information, whether voice, data, or video, as quickly and easily as we now receive voice. He said that this would require major changes in technology as well as regulation.

Nelson described the NII's four components:


In describing how this differs from what we currently have, he said that the Administration was concentrating on ensuring that these systems were interoperable and that there would be more bandwidth in the last mile. He said the government will provide leadership, but completion of the NII will require major private sector investment.

The federal government will not build the NII, he said, but it will assist in research and development, fund pilot projects, use the NII as a consumer of communications, and revise regulatory policy to take account of technological changes. This revised policy, Nelson said, should recognize that an information bit is an information bit, regardless of whether it is in a computer or telecommunications system.

Nelson described the Information Infrastructure Task Force and its committees on Telecommunications Policy, Information Policy, and Applications. He also listed several Administration initiatives: privatizing the Internet, which has grown so far beyond its original academic purpose that government subsidy is no longer appropriate; finding ways to ensure privacy on the NII while recognizing law enforcement needs; enabling telephone companies (telcos) and cable companies to compete, which will promote consumer choice; and using foreign aid to create new markets for the export of American technology and information.

Congress

Representative Michael G. Oxley (R-OH), a member of the Telecommunications and Finance Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, mentioned that there was not much divergence from the Administration on these issues and stressed the importance of competition in the development of the NII. He stated that current government regulation is standing in the way of this competition and impeding the progress of companies that are constructing the information superhighways. Therefore, in order to accelerate the development of the NII, Congress should stay out of the way. Newly merged companies will export American technology and intellectual property throughout the world, while the competition they create will lower the cost of local phone service.

Telecommunications policy, Congressman Oxley said, must keep pace with technological change, and should be crafted by elected representatives, not an unelected federal judge. Congress has shirked its obligation in the past, but that is starting to change, partly as a result of the Administration's willingness to tackle these issues. Congress needs to take hold of its responsibilities and move forward. There are many special interests, but the goal should be to get the best price and services to the consumer; this is best done through competition.

Department of Commerce

Arati Prabhakar, director of the Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), said that the federal government can be an important leader in the development of the NII, in addition to being its largest user. The government can use technology to improve its own efficiency, as well as fund pilot projects in hospitals, libraries, and other institutions.

NIST, she added, will not mandate standards for the new technologies. Instead, it will work with industry to establish voluntary standards. She also noted that American companies can no longer unilaterally set international standards; however, they must take into account what other nations are doing in their own standards-setting processes. There is a basic disconnect between how technology develops and how standards are set. Setting standards generally takes five years, which represents between two and 10 generations in information technology. This process must be expedited to match the pace of technological development.

Dr. Prabhakar also described NIST's role in the Advanced Technology Program and its funding of high-risk projects. The program's 1994 budget is $200 million, and the anticipated 1997 budget is $750 million. NIST is currently polling industry for ideas on areas of focus.