On the recordApril 27, 2004
What concerns me is that both the 1998 definition and the proposal of the Senator from Tennessee essentially discriminates against the future because the future is about broadband, particularly for rural areas, for job creation, and highly skilled jobs. If you use the 1998 definition, or essentially the Senator's proposal for just Internet access--I emphasis that is all we are talking about, Internet access--what you will have is a situation where folks could get Internet access through cable and those folks end up essentially getting a free ride. But if you get the Internet access and future DSL, you are going to get taxed. That is why Senator McCain and I and others would like to essentially continue the 7-year path we have had which is to promote technological neutrality--not to advantage one technology against another. On the question of Internet access, which is what the President talked about yesterday where he said he doesn't want to see Internet access get taxed, that is what is in the McCain proposal. That is what I was trying to do. Unfortunately, that is not in the Senator's proposal or in the 1998 definition. What will happen is this country will have the technology policy that discriminates against the future and discriminates against the field in which it is going to create highly skilled jobs. By the way, cable isn't going to be serving those rural areas. It is going to be broadband and DSL which serves them.
Source
govinfo.gov




