Why You Should Care About the Digital Divide

Why You Should Care

The information revolution is exciting, and at its best, is about expanding equality of opportunity for all in our society. But not all Americans have shared the benefits of this progress. A "digital divide" persists between those who have the training and access to technologies that enable them to take advantage of the Internet and advanced communications technologies and those who are unable to take full advantage of the tools, skills, benefits, and employment opportunities available in the new economy.

Most of the focus around the digital divide has centered around access to computers and the Internet. Absent from these debates has been what information and activities are available over the Internet- the "there" online.

Impact

Recent reports on the state of the digital divide in the United States, though optimistic, still indicate that the explosive growth in new technologies have not occurred evenly across boundaries of geography, race, socio-economic status, educational level, disability, gender, age, and bandwidth. Low-income children and Native Americans are particularly under-served. These disparities deny us all the fullest contributions of our fellow citizens.

Technology skills are already critical for stable, high-paying jobs. As the information economy continues to develop, the opportunity to develop skill in advanced technologies will become a more central part of what is needed to ensure all segments of society participate fully in the Digital Age.

Making the transition to the Digital Age and an information technology economy requires new policies to ensure that presently underserved individuals possess the skills needed in the information sector.

A recent study by the Information Technology Association of America found that the number of needed IT positions in the U.S. declined to 900,000 for 2001, with an expected vacancy rate of 425,000. While substantially lower than in 2000, the ITAA study shows that demand for appropriately skilled high tech workers persists.

However, the Commission on the Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering, and Technology Development, only 3.2% of jobs in those areas are held by African-Americans and 3% by Latinos . Although current labor statistics are unavailable, the Engineering Workforce Commission reported that in 1997, Native Americans' share of the total number of bachelor's degrees earned in science and engineering was only 0.45%.

This job training and opportunity gap also affects women. According to the American Association of University Women, high school girls represent only 17% of the students taking Computer Science Advanced Placement exams, only 10% of students taking higher level Computer Science "AB" exams, and their rate of graduating with computer science bachelor's degrees has actually decreased from 37% in 1984 to less than 28% in 2000. Additionally women constitute only 20% of the information technology professional workforce.

Moreover, the technology companies at the cutting edge of the economy must make a serious commitment to job training programs that target low-income communities, people of color, and women, and that aggressively recruit at all skill levels. It is not enough to hide behind the "skills gap" when basic questions of equal opportunity are at stake.

The Children's Partnership, in a report entitled, "Online Content for Low-Income and Underserved Americans," estimates that at least 50 million Americans -- roughly 20 percent -- face one or more content-related barriers that stand between them and the benefits offered by the Internet. Among the leading barriers are: lack of local information (21 million* affected Americans); literacy barriers (44 million*); language barriers (32 million*); and lack of cultural diversity (26 million*). (*estimates)

For example, language barriers may be exhibited by the absence of content in Spanish. There is relatively little Spanish content online. A 2000 survey released by VilaWeb.com, a Catalan-language online information service, found that 68% of Internet content was in English, while less than 3% of Internet content was in Spanish.

Another report by the Cultural Access Group, entitled, "Ethnicity in the Electronic Age," (Adobe Acrobat required) found that communities of color differ from "general market users" in some important ways. For example, unlike many general market users, most online Hispanics and African Americans have children at home. According to the report, "Many online Hispanics and African Americans have more children and family considerations as it pertains to the Internet than general market respondents."

Background

The Technology Opportunities Program (TOP)

The Clinton administration requested $45.5 million for TOP and Congress appropriated $42.5 million for grants through the Commerce Department's Technology Opportunities Program for FY 2001.

Community Technology Centers (CTCs)

The Clinton administration requested $100 million for 1000 community technology centers and Congress appropriated $65 million for 650 community technology centers in FY 2001.

Other legislation in the 106th Congress focusing on support for community technology centers included:

Senator Barbara Mikulski's, D. Md., bill, S. 2229, "The Digital Empowerment Act", supported the Clinton Administration's $100 million request for funding of the CTC program by requesting $100 million for program funding. The bill was read twice and then referred to the Senate Committee on Finance where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.
Senator Joseph Biden's, D. Del., bill, S. 2061, "The Kids 2000 Act," provided funding for CTCs through the Department of Justice as part of an effort to reduce juvenile crime. Specifically, $20 million would be available for grants to Boys and Girls Clubs to create technology centers in partnership with groups such as Power Up. The bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.
Senator Edward Kennedy, D. Mass., offered an amendment to ESEA that authorized $100million in funding for CTCs within the authorizing statute of ESEA. While the CTCs have been included in the annual ESEA appropriation for several years, the program has never been authorized. Neither of the ESEA authorization bills reported out of the House or Senate Committees this year included the CTC program. Senator Kennedy proposed an amendment to the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee but the amendment was defeated.

Home Internet Access Program

The Clinton administration proposed $50 million for HIAP for expanding access to computers for low-income families and for skills development but received no funds for FY 2001.

The Education Rate (E-Rate)

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 established the E-rate. Designed as part of the Universal Service program, the E-rate provides discounts of 20% to 90% to schools and libraries on telecommunications, internal connections, and advanced services (including Internet access). Although the E-rate was under considerable attack in the 105th Congress, there were no serious legislative challenges to the E-rate program in the 106th Congress.

The FCC voted to fully fund the E-rate program for its third year, providing $2.25 billion. These funds provide deep discounts for schools and libraries on internal connections, and allow all applicants to receive discounts on telecommunications services (including telephone and leased line services). But due to high demand and limited funds, many schools and libraries were unable to receive funding for their internal connections. In its first three years, the E-Rate has distributed over $5.85 billion in discounts to telecommunications providers and other eligible entities for services to schools and libraries. More information is available from the Schools and Libraries Division of the Universal Service Administration Company. The third year of E-rate funding was disbursed April 2000 in the sum of $2.08 billion. The deadline for fourth year applications was January 2001, with funding commitment letters for the fourth year to be distributed in the spring of 2001.

At the end of 2001 there was yet another attempt to undermine the E-Rate program: this time it came in the guise of an effort to expand the Rural Health Care program (RHC) and finance that expansion by using as much as $390 million of E-Rate funds. Thanks to the assistance of House Commerce Ranking Member Dingell, D. Mich., this attack was thwarted and the E-Rate funding stream protected.

Individuals with Disabilities

As new technologies become central to American life, the issue of assuring accessibility for individuals with disabilities has become more urgent. While the most important questions --- whether the ADA and other relevant laws apply to the Internet ---are more likely to be resolved in the courts than in Congress, it is important to keep watch for any preemptive move in Congress to take the Internet out of the ADA or otherwise limit obligations around accessibility.

In 1998, Congress enacted a limited measure to encourage accessibility when it amended Sec. 508 of the Rehabilitation Act to require federal agencies to purchase, develop, maintain and use technology that is accessible to persons with disabilities. This means that all information technology products procured by the federal government were to be compliant with accessibility requirements after August 7, 2000. Every two years, Section 508 requires that the Department of Justice report to Congress and the President on the federal government's progress with respect to section 508 compliance.

Native Americans

Lifeline and Link Up are joint federal and state programs that provide discounts for low-income consumers on ongoing telephone charges and telephone installation charges, respectively. The programs have been in existence since the 1980s as part of the larger Universal Service program, which subsidizes telephone service for rural areas.

Broadband

The deployment of high-speed "broadband" service was perhaps one of the most important and complicated telecommunications policy issues before the 106th Congress and the FCC. Among the important issues: whether high speed Internet access will be deployed in underserved and rural areas; whether broadband deployment will lead to consolidation rather than competition; whether the competing industries will provide a range of services and prices that serves the needs of all consumers; and whether the new Internet environment will continue to encourage and support diversity and robust speech.

The answers to these questions will have a profound impact on the economic well being of communities, their ability to deliver distance learning and real time medical services, build local e-commerce and fully participate in democratic discourse.

Several of the bills introduced in the 106th Congress took a purely deregulatory approach to the broadband issue. In addition, two bills address the deployment of broadband services to underserved communities in the context of the digital divide.

Internet Freedom and Broadband Deployment Act of 1999," (H.R. 2420), sponsored by Rep. Billy Tauzin, R. La., and its companion bill in the Senate, the "Broadband Internet Regulatory Relief Act of 1999," (S. 877), sponsored by Sen. Sam Brownback, R. Kan., sought to lift regulations on local telephone companies that prevented them from crossing local access transport area (LATA) boundaries. Although proponents of these measures claimed this would encourage the Bells to deploy in rural areas, opponents feared that the data networks would become vehicles for the Bells to enter the long distance phone market without first opening up the local telephone market to competition as the law requires. H.R. 2420 was referred to the House Committee on Commerce where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress. S. 877 was read twice and referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.
"The Internet Growth and Development Act of 1999" and "Internet Freedom Act," (H.R. 1685 and H.R. 1686,) sponsored by Reps. Bob Goodlatte, R. Va., and Rick Boucher, D. Va., respectively, sought to lift the LATA restriction on the Bells while at the same time imposing "open access" requirements on all broadband providers across platforms. Hearings on H.R. 1685 were held at the Judiciary Committee but no further action was taken in the 106th Congress. H.R. 1686 was referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.
"The Rural Broadband Enhancement Act," (S. 2307), sponsored by Senator Byron Dorgan, D. N.D., sought to provide incentives for broadband deployment in rural and underserved areas by extending the Universal Service program to include support for the deployment of broadband and specifically includes broadband in the Rural Utilities Service's loan programs (which in the past has provided low cost loans to rural telephone companies). The bill would have provided $3 billion per year in funding for the RUS program for FY 2001 through 2005. S. 2307 was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.
"The Rural Telecommunications Modernization Act," (S. 2321), sponsored by Sens. John Rockefeller, D. W.V., and Olympia Snowe, R. Maine, sought to provide a 10% tax credit for companies deploying broadband in rural and underserved areas. S. 2321 was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.

The H1-B Visa Extension

One of the most difficult and controversial issues that faced the 106th Congress was whether and how to raise the limit on H-1B visas, which permitted skilled foreign workers to take high tech jobs in the United States. Proponents in the high tech industry pointed to the shortage of American workers with computer, math, science and other high tech skills and to the high number of unfilled jobs (over 269,000 in Silicon Valley alone). While acknowledging the problem, opponents wanted to see the visa bill tied to serious education and training initiatives for American workers in order to close this hiring gap. Principal legislative proposals included:

S. 2045, the "Non-Immigrant Specialty Worker Bill (American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000)," sponsored by Senator Orrin Hatch, R. Utah, became law and will incrementally raise the H1-B visa level to 130,000 by 2002. S. 2045 became Public Law No. 106-313 on October 17, 2000.
H.R. 4227, "The Technology Worker Temporary Relief Act," sponsored by Rep. Lamar Smith, R. Texas, Chair of the House Immigration Subcommittee, H.R. 4227 sought to increase the number of temporary H1-B workers for the next two years but also would have required companies applying for the visas to demonstrate that they have increased hiring of and increased compensation for American workers. An earlier bill introduced by Rep. Smith applied even more stringent requirements on businesses and was opposed by the high tech industry. H.R. 4227 was placed on the calendar but never came up for a vote in the 106th Congress.
H.R. 3983, "Helping to Improve Technology Education and Achievement Act of 2000," a bipartisan bill cosponsored by Reps. David Dreier, R. Calif., Zoe Lofgren, D. Calif., Dick Armey, R. Texas, and Cal Dooley, D. Calif., sought to increase the cap on the H1-B visas to 200,000 for 2001 through 2003. H.R. 3983 directed fees from visas to scholarships and loan forgiveness for science and math teachers. H.R. 3983 was referred to the House Judiciary Committee, House Education and Workforce Committee and the House Science Committee where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.
H.R. 4200, the "American Worker Information Technology Skills Improvement Act of 2000 (AWITSIA)," introduced by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D. Texas, and cosponsored by a bipartisan group, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus and moderate Republicans, sought to raise the number of H1-B visas to 225,000 with some restricted to immigrants with master degrees or PhDs. The bill was referred to the House Judiciary Committee and the House Education and Workforce Committee. The bill was then referred to the House Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.

Despite the economic slowdown demand for H-1B workers continues to rise. In the first eight months of 2001, the Immigration and Naturalization Service received 224,876 H-1B applications. That is a 12.5 percent increase from the same period in fiscal year 2000, when it received a record 199,836 H-1B requests. The INS approved 117,000 H-1B applications from October, the beginning of the government's fiscal year, to May 23. It had a backlog of at least 40,000 applications waiting for approval. Contrary to popular belief H-1B visa holders are an extremely diverse pool of workers with fifty-nine percent working in information technology, and 5 percent working in electronics or engineering. The rest are primarily teachers, researchers, accountants, auditors, economists, doctors or commercial artists. Forty-eight percent of H-1B visa holders are from India, 9 percent are from China, 3 percent are from the United Kingdom, 3 percent are from Canada, and 3 percent are from the Philippines. Forty-two percent of all H-1B visa holders were living in the United States when their visas were approved, mainly on student visas or on visas for spouses and children of foreign students or visitors.

Other Workforce Training Proposals

Sen. Kent Conrad, D. N.D., on April 3rd, introduced S. 2347, the "Information Technology Act of 2000." The bill sought to authorize $100 million in matching Federal grants for partnerships to carry out information technology training programs for minorities, women, older individuals, veterans, Native Americans, dislocated workers, and students who have not completed their high school education.
Eligible grant recipients would have included institutions of higher education, private organizations and businesses. The bill also would have authorized $5,000 bonuses for teachers who become certified in information technology in accordance with recognized standards. The total authorization for the program is $100 million beginning in FY 2001 for 5 years. The bill was referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.
Senator Barbara Mikulski's, D. Md., "Digital Empowerment Act" (S. 2229) , sought to provide $1.25 billion in funding as part of Titles I and II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act; of the $1.25 billion, $150 million was earmarked for teacher training, $250 million was earmarked for school libraries and media centers (and school librarian training), and $850 million was earmarked for the expansion of the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund (TLCF). The $850 million represented an increase of 100% over the current funding level for the TLCF. The bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Finance where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.
"The Digital Education Act," (S. 1029 and H.R. 2965) sponsored by Senator Thad Cochran, R. Miss., and Rep. Marge Roukema, R. N.J., sought to provide $20 million in grants annually for the creation of distributed professional development and teacher training. Both bills were referred to committee where no further action was taken in the 106th Congress.