USTelecom Says Reclassification Would Cut Broadband Investment

said it would challenge reclassification in court. In an ex parte letter USTelecom also asked Wednesday for the commission to review the study. Title II proponents Free Press and Public Knowledge quickly dismissed the study. “This is another example of a made-to-order industry study, with predictions giving them the result they want, facts be damned,” said Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood. The study’s authors, Kevin Hassett and Robert Shapiro, said they had devised a new model that measures investment trends for services covered under Title II and not covered by the classification, then estimates the impact reclassification to Title II would have for both wireline and wireless. The study estimates that under the current regulatory structure, broadband providers are expected to make about $218.8 billion in new capital investments over the next five years. If the commission opts for reclassification, investments by ISPs would drop over the next five years to as low as $173.4 billion. Additional regulation, as well as the current regulatory uncertainty over net neutrality, and whether other aspects of the Internet will fall under Title II, would reduce the rate of return on the investments and deter spending, said Hassett, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. He was chief economic adviser to Republican presidential candidate John McCain during the 2000 primaries. Responding to a question, Shapiro said it’s not possible to factor how forbearance from Title II, as reclassification’s proponents advocate, would affect their projections. “To what level [there will be forbearance], how long it would take, what the legal process would be are all in a state of uncertainty,” said Shapiro, chairman of Sonecon, and chief economic adviser to President Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign. A reduction in investment would be significant, Shapiro said, because “the Internet plays such a critical role in the economic, social and political life” of the U.S. “Reclassification of broadband as Title II would be contrary to the national interest of broadband deployment and investment,” USTelecom President Walter McCormick said during a call with reporters. Wood called the study “absurd,” and said telecom investment reached its peak while still under Title II. “USTA's flimsy study is nothing more than a cynical attempt to scare Washington policymakers,” Wood said. The study didn’t factor in that the same infrastructure is used for voice, video and data, which are regulated differently, said Free Press Research Director Derek Turner. It also measured all capital investments, when nine “out of every 10 capital dollars spent by cable companies goes to set-top boxes and modems, not to the network,” Turner emailed. Turner's criticisms "unfortunately do not advance the debate," Hassett and Shapiro said in a statement to us. The economists said they included "reasonable assumptions" to account for the use of the same infrastructure by various services. The researchers said they did not examine cable, and stood by measuring capital investments, calling that the "the best metric for the overall impact of Title II regulation." Public Knowledge Senior Vice President Harold Feld also criticized USTelecom’s request for the study to be considered. “Of course the FCC will 'review' it, just like they review any other submission," Feld said. Of USTelecom, he said, "What do they want, a gold star?”