Rural Fiber: A Waste of Money, and a Blow to Progress

Rural Fiber: Are We Sacrificing City Speeds at the Altar of the Heartland?

For years, we've heard the triumphant narrative: broadband expansion into rural America is a victory for equity, a bridge to opportunity. And yes, it’s commendable that farmers can now stream cat videos. But let's be blunt: the relentless push for rural fiber optic deployment is demonstrably choking the innovation and speed advancement we deserve in urban and suburban areas. It's a classic case of robbing Peter to pay Paul, and frankly, Paul isn't even using his share responsibly.

The current obsession, fueled by federal subsidies and breathless pronouncements of “bridging the digital divide,” has created a warped market. Billions are being poured into laying fiber in areas with abysmal return on investment – areas where, let's be honest, the primary consumer is likely still using dial-up speed to check their email. Meanwhile, those of us living in established urban and suburban centers – the very places that drive the nation's economy – are left with increasingly stagnant internet options.

Let’s examine the facts. Where is the innovation coming from in the broadband sector? It wasn't coming from Beltrami County, Minnesota. It was from the labs and research facilities here, in the areas struggling to maintain even a semblance of competitive internet service. Yet, the focus, and the funding, is diverted elsewhere. Why develop the next generation of wireless technology, the next leap in DOCSIS speeds, when you can throw money at a project that will barely nudge the needle on the national broadband map?

The rationale, of course, is laudable: ensuring everyone has access is a societal good. But that doesn’t excuse the blatant distortion of the market. The prioritization of rural deployments has effectively starved innovation in areas with significantly higher population density and economic impact. The investment dollars that should be driving the next wave of technological advancements – allowing us to work, learn, and entertain ourselves at speeds that don't resemble a dial-up modem – are instead being used to patch up the digital equivalent of a single dirt road.

And don’t even start me on the proliferation of community-based broadband providers, lauded by sycophants as champions of rural connectivity. These cooperatives, while well-intentioned, often lack the resources and expertise to truly deliver cutting-edge service. They're content to offer slow, inconsistent speeds and value-added services that are, frankly, a distraction from the core problem: a lack of robust, reliable infrastructure. They get the subsidies, the accolades, while the rest of us are stuck with the scraps.

The so-called "digital divide" wasn't created by a lack of fiber optic cable. It’s a result of systemic inequalities, affordability issues, and a regulatory environment that prioritizes feel-good projects over genuine technological advancement.

We need a serious re-evaluation of our broadband priorities. Rural connectivity is important, yes. But it shouldn’t come at the expense of the innovation and speed we deserve as citizens and contributors to the national economy. It's time to stop throwing money at a problem that isn't as simple as laying a few cables and start investing in the future of the entire nation, not just a handful of farms. Otherwise, we risk ending up with a digitally divided nation where the heartland has marginally better internet, and the rest of us are left in the slow lane.