Remarks of FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler at Silicon Flatirons

All the focus on Net Neutrality overshadows the reality that today’s Net is not something that stands on its own; it is the product of broadband connectivity. The terms “Internet” and “broadband” are too often used synonymously – but they are not the same. The way the Internet works today is a result of broadband infrastructure. If broadband is too slow, if it does not reach enough people, if there are not competitive choices, there are consequences for the Net, for sure -- but the effects don’t stop there.

So, today let’s talk about broadband. Yes, that will also involve the Internet, but our focus should first be on that which enables the Internet.

Our challenge is to achieve the legitimate goal of economic return as an incentive for investment in broadband infrastructure, and the equally important goal of networks that are fast, fair and open for all Americans.

To accomplish those aims, the Federal Communications Commission is in the midst of three historic decisions.

Act One in this effort tackled the issue of fast networks. The Commission voted to establish a new definition for broadband as 25 Mbps down and 3 Mbps up. This was an increase from the old standard of 4 Mbps down and 1 Mbps up.

Act Two of our broadband initiative will open on February 26 with a Commission vote on the petitions of two cities, Chattanooga (TN) and Wilson (NC), which seek to provide highspeed broadband to their citizens, but have been obstructed by their state legislatures. The issue is simple and direct: when the people, through their elected local officials, take action to expand access to high-speed broadband and offer competitive choices, their will should not be thwarted.

Act Three: open networks. There is a difference between closed and open networks. Innovation without permission is that difference. We need to balance the goals of openness with the needs of network operators to receive a return on their investment. We will forgo sections of Title II that pose a meaningful threat to network investment. That means no rate regulation. No unbundling. No tariffs or new taxes. I would note that when applied to mobile voice service over the past two decades, the use of such light-touch Title II -- which, by the way, was sought by the industry -- went hand-in-hand with massive investment.