Universal service: A new definition?

The concept of “universal service obligation” (USO) has been around for decades; however, its definition continues to change. The notion that the last mile of fixed-line access should be subsidized has spread around the world, despite well reasoned arguments and empirical evidence that the policy is and was a failure. It created artificial competition. Now the concept is becoming bifurcated. Should wireless and/or broadband services be included in the definition of universal services? The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate why the definition should be expanded, although a definitive prescription is not offered.This paper is in two parts: What should constitute USO definitions and how, if at all, it should be implemented? Many consumers are “cutting-the-cord” and moving directly to alternative services. In this ubiquitous communications environment the whole set of possible communications methods should be considered when defining “universal connectivity.” Second, no one service or technology should be relied on to support subsidies.The second part of the paper addresses the policy question: How should this connectivity be achieved?