Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Leticia Miranda — How States Are Fighting to Keep Towns From Offering Their Own Broadband

More fascism corporate statism.
Earlier this year, the Federal Communications Commission voted to ease the way for cities to become Internet service providers. So-called municipal broadband is already a reality in a few towns, often providing Internet access and faster service to rural communities that cable companies don’t serve. 
The cable and telecommunications industry have long lobbied against city-run broadband, arguing that taxpayer money should not fund potential competitors to private companies.

The telecom companies have what may seem like an unlikely ally: states. Roughly 20 states have restrictions against municipal broadband....


Dan Lynch said...

I would not like it if the government subsidized my competition. But .... internet service is monopolistic. IMHO the government has a legitimate role in dealing with monopolies, either by regulating monopolies, breaking up monopolies, or by socializing them.

My state takes a dim view of competing with the private sector. For example, my local road district has a big pile of gravel that does not meet specifications, so it just sits there. I suggested they sell or give the defective gravel to local residents, but was told that's a no-no because it would be competing with the private sector. Problem is, there is only one private source of gravel in the area and that source refuses to sell to us unless we also hire him to spread the gravel, which costs much more than the gravel itself.

So nobody wins except the one monopolistic gravel guy. :-(

Roger Erickson said...

"arguing that taxpayer money should not fund potential competitors to private companies."

Hilarious. So we should go back to reliance on privately funded toll roads?

While we're at it, why not scrap the DoD and rely on private security firms ... aka, vigilantes?

Tom Hickey said...

Roger, that is exactly what some people want or as close to it as they can get.