(continued from page 3 -The Final Mile) Through the Rural Utility Service, the descendant agency of the REA, grant funding is available for just such a program. Management of the service would be provided by either a non-profit organization, or a governmental or quasi-governmental (public service corporation) agency. It is possible that management could be contracted with private providers, cooperative agencies or municipalities. There are a number of regulatory questions still to be addressed. Third, models are currently being developed to demonstrate the efficacy of the technology. These models are being set up in a number of rural communities across Arizona. Based on their performance we will be able to answer many of the questions. In conclusion we must keep in mind the importance of ensuring universal access to a quality education. In response to the obstacles to educational opportunity created by segregation a century ago the U.S. Supreme Court responded, “Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.” Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483, 1954 (at 493) This sentiment applies just as well to the importance of providing access to internet connectivity. More recently the court considered the importance of state action to provide equitable access to educational opportunities and found, in the words of concurring Justice Harry Blackmun, “In my view, when the State provides an education to some and denies it to others, it immediately and inevitably creates class distinctions of a type fundamentally inconsistent with those purposes, mentioned above, of the Equal Protection Clause. Children denied an education are placed at a permanent and insurmountable competitive disadvantage, for an uneducated child is denied even the opportunity to achieve. And when those children are members of an identifiable group, that group — through the State’s action — will have been converted into a discrete underclass. Other benefits provided by the State, such as housing and public assistance, are of course important; to an individual in immediate need, they may be more desirable than the right to be educated. But classifications involving the complete denial of education are in a sense unique, for they strike at the heart of equal protection values by involving the State in the creation of permanent class distinctions.” Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 1982 (at 234) The extent to which technology in the home can effectively deny a child access to an education has expanded exponentially over the last few years, and we are in a position to establish patterns of service that will overcome the potential deficit. In 1882 the technology existed to light the first mile from Union Square to Madison Square, and those who could, traveled to marvel at what had been accomplished. Now we have the opportunity to reach out and bring access to the prosperity made possible by a more interconnected world to those in rural Arizona by bridging the gap and taking it the Final Mile. Page 15 “Stronger Together!”
16 Publizr Home