Last night, Axios uncovered a document from the Trump administration’s National Security Council that floated the idea of a government-owned 5G wireless network. Their reasoning for considering such an idea was that they believe China to be evil, that China will spy on us if we allow their 5G network products in our country, and that the US doesn’t want China crushing it economically by being the major provider of said equipment. That narrative shouldn’t surprise you after watching the assault on Huawei we saw during and immediately after CES. Both Huawei and ZTE were mentioned numerous times throughout the document.
As you can imagine, anyone interested in wireless freaked the hell out after this report dropped, wondered if the US government was serious about this, how it might affect Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint, and whether or not the FCC would even be on board with such a move, you know, since this is kind of their area of expertise.
To address that first point, the Trump admin told Reuters last night that this Trump 5G proposal was only being debated at low levels of the admin and that it was likely six to eight months away from ever being considered by the president. They did confirm that their reasoning for a government-owned 5G network was to stop China’s threat to US cyber and economic security. They want a network where the “Chinese can’t listen to your calls,” a senior official said.
With all of that in mind (whether realistic or baseless fear-mongering), the Trump administration said today to Recode that they currently have no plans to build any such 5G network. Their sources suggested that this proposal was merely floated by a staff member and might never be anything more than that.
The FCC’s chairman, Ajit Pai, weighed in this morning as well, saying that he opposes “any proposal for the federal government to build and operate a nationwide 5G network.” As you probably guessed, Pai would rather the private sector handle our wireless networks and set “rules that encourage” them to developer the next-generation infrastructure, like 5G.
I oppose any proposal for the federal government to build and operate a nationwide 5G network. The market, not the government, is best positioned to drive innovation and investment. https://t.co/viIDB4mb0f pic.twitter.com/hgxRLtwoU4
— Ajit Pai (@AjitPai) January 29, 2018
And that’s about all there is to say about that. I wish I had a scorching hot take for you now, but I have none.
This NEEDS to happen!!! They can call it the Alternet. It could make Altavista their preferred web search engine and provide alternate facts all day. “Patriots” like Defcon could rant and rave and insult all day long and be praised on there. Do a Wonkipedia search for US presidents and see fantastic results. Faux News alerts all day! Make this happen for the hilarity alone!!!
Ajit Pai gets it right again, keep the government away from the internet. It is shocking to find a federal buerocrat whom is pushing for less power and deregulation…but I love it!
This is a gift to apple and qualcomm. Apple repatriated $, so the gov. pressured AT&T to break up with Huawei, who would probably rocket to a market leader here if they got a carrier support (they were working with AT&T to develop 5G standards, too).
Hmm… I’m of mixed minds on this.
There was that recent report of Xaomi devices sending a lot of data to remote Chinese servers (which has been a thing at least since 2014, so….), so I can kinda understand the concern about using Chinese hardware in a high-level manner.
I don’t trust Ajit Pai at all. I don’t think he has the best interests of the American people in mind… ever.
I’m not exactly trusting of the government in general, nor do I trust the telecoms/private companies, either. However, of the two that I’d rather regulate networking infrastructure? Probably the government, as much as I don’t like saying that.
No
How I love Trump. He pulled a age old typical “Made you look” prank…..I never once thought he was serious, but it got all the tight underwear wearing millennial snowflakes that think anything on MTV is cool and serious. Millennial’s, get back to McDonald’s and get me my fries!
Lay off the Mt. Dew guy
That’s comforting to know my calls and anything I do is being listened to and or watched. Then you watch a movie like Snowden and realize you really have no privacy whatsoever anyways.
Of course Pai opposes it, it would hurt his pockets when Verizon and others actually have to compete
Yes.
Of course someone in the Trump administration proposed controlling 5G….it’s what authoritarian governments do. Control the flow of information. Fortunately, there are enough full-time federal employees to knock that political appointee dogma crap down. But still, it’s a new regime now that someone would even put pen to paper to propose something like government controlled information media.
Right but if Odildo wanted it you would be all for it right? Mmkay then.
Who?
Obummer….I mean Odumbo….crap….Obama
Who?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1ca6df21f6211c4bfd2f3fcb8864fb8a6f333efddb9543d5931c07eff0ce3f7a.jpg
Totally agree with not wanting Chinese products in our network, but the US government doesn’t need to be in the business of making a 5G networks.
Hey why not. It would be cheaper for consumers like when taxes were used to spread the cable infrastructure… ????
I’m kinda out to lunch on this one. On one hand, I like the idea of community broadband. On the other, can we really trust Trumpnet to be an open, high-speed network?
At least you know the network will be HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE!!!!!
Thank you for writing an article based on known facts and not injecting political opinion masked as factual information.
That will come later
I want it simply because Ajit Pai doesnt
BWAHAHA!!!
Me too, I hate that man
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5686f16402b9db85ce38d2eac7aaf6e428722c1d1f022bab2d3dc02d02b8ed3b.jpg
Everyone should love losing!
You’re a partisan hack.
I just lost brain cells
Why can’t we have both? USPS, FedEx, UPS. It’s nice to have more options. Public and private options don’t have to be mutually exclusive. Different strokes, for different folks.
Agreed.
Also agree, it may mean more reliable options for rural Americans who will never be a priority for business.
You’re suggesting rural Americans never get packages delivered to them or don’t currently have cell service?
I’m suggesting cell service, and broaband in general, blows outside of metro areas and that’s where Gov can help. Free market is great, but leaves gaps. Not everything has to be $ driven.
why should i have to pay for your broadband? If you want broadband, live in a more urban area.
The farmers who grow the crops and raise livestock we all consume should move to the urban areas where they can’t continue to do that? Or should they just be SoL staying in the rural areas for us who buy their food?
you are assuming everyone in a rural area is a farmer when actually very few are. Sorry, farmers get enough govt subsidies as it is, they can pay up if they want faster internet. Satellite internet is fine. Quit acting like people are going to quit farming over the lack of internet. My point is that if someone doesnt like slow internet, move to the city. somebody will buy the farm from you and continue farming and won’t mind slow internet. that’s how the world works.
Everything certainly does have to be driven by money. How in the world do you think the federal government would build this infrastructure? Capitalism, while not perfect, is the greatest system ever devised by man to bring more wealth and opportunity to more people than any other idea in the world. The government doesn’t create things for free, it simply steals more from you to create with horrible inefficiency to boot.
Wait, are you suggesting the Federal Government will make 5G networks in rural areas faster than private business? When has the federal government ever done anything efficiently? You will get 5G networks as soon as you get 5 lane highways into your rural neighborhoods.
Federal Government assistance will get it there faster than private sector will alone.
Federal Government assistance will also get us all a free Tesla and a couple million in our bank accounts right? Why don’t we ask for those things?
Answer: because it would be wasteful and ridiculous to ask the government to steal money from it’s citizens to provide inefficient services to rural areas of our country with no ability to recoup it’s loses. On top of that if we consider the role of government as outlined by our constitution, running a 5G network is not even close to being an option.
Just a reminder: We are currently 20 Trillion in debt in this country or more specifically, we all currently owe $400,000 in debt. this doesn’t even take into account the $150 trillion or so of unfunded liabilities. So lets all stop pretending that the Federal Government is the fountain of youth when it comes to currency and realize that they are bleeding us dry and many want to encourage them to bleed more because they love the taste of the blood.
How do you think poorer areas got other infrastructure items that connected them with the rest of the country? A Tesla isn’t what you ask for when you’re stuck walking, a bike would do. You act like the service would be free or something. That isn’t how the broadband assistance program works now anyway.
Was expecting a dumpster fire in these comments but this actually makes a lot of sense!
I think you spoke a bit early.
*sigh*
tax payer money should not be used to pay for this period.
We’ve already paid for it. Look at the handouts the telcos get for building their Network. Yes, mostly in tax breaks but it’s still tax payers dollars.
If it’s tax breaks, how is it tax payers’ dollars? This is implying that you have a right to other people’s money.
Your logic makes zero sense…
Stealing less money from Person A doesn’t mean that Person B is having more of his money stolen. It simply means less money is being taken out of Person A’s pocket, that is all. With that said Person A can then choose to spend that money is more appropriate ways.
I wouldn’t be shocked to find out that the Federal Government has given telecoms subsidies, which are partially tax payer money and partially moneys created out of thin air (in essence a tax increase as it devalues your wealth).
Where USPS competes directly with other shippers, it has a tiny market share.
Do you think government should subsidize failing companies at taxpayer expense? Because that’s what USPS is. It would go out of business tomorrow if the government wasn’t subsidizing it.
Are you saying we should stop funding the post office?
Yes.
How do we get our mail?
Let UPS and FedEx handle it.
Because they don’t use USPS for package delivery.
Except UPS and FedEx don’t to the last mile out side of the cities. What do they do? They pass it off to USPS. Hummm, sounds like like the “last mile” issue with ISPs.
Um, UPS delivers packages to my doorstep all the time.
Besides, there is actually a history of private mail companies in the US, and they were successful… Until the government shut them down.
We should. The USPS should be put out of its misery.
Remember when the gov’t basically subsidized the entire U.S. automotive industry?
The USPS is completely self sufficient and is not funded by tax payer dollars.
“Self sufficient” companies are not $125 billion in the hole.
Politicians are forcing USPS to prepay into their retirement system. This entirely a budget sheet in the red political game.
Their pension fund is so grossly mismanaged and underfunded it would drive a normal company into bankruptcy.