I've looked over coverage of President Bush's broadband plans, and they're "the old switcheroo." (Image from TechCentralStation.)

That is, they sound good on a superficial level, but a look at the fine print shows a different picture.

The headlines are grabbers. There's the goal of universal access, and a call against taxes. Both sound great.

The problem is how we get there. The Bush plan is simply not market-oriented.

A market-oriented plan wouldn't impose hidden taxes on our access endorsing a cable-phone carrier duopoly that was created through protected monopolies.

A market-oriented plan wouldn't fence-off wireless spectrum as property. Bush is planning on continuing the Clinton-era policy of auctioning-off spectrum, rather than treating spectrum for what it is, an ocean where non-interference should be our guide.

I should say here, as a Democrat, that the party's initial criticisms of Bush's plans were, frankly, small-minded and counter-productive. We have seen what happens to Universal Service subsidies -- they go right back into the pockets of the Bells -- and the Kerry criticisms of Bush's plan seem aimed at just making that worse.

At the risk of repeating myself, we can increase broadband take-up dramatically without spending a dime of the government's money. Here's how: