Anti-Muni Broadband Bills Country Wide 655
Ant writes "Broadband Reports says that 14 and possibly more states that have or will pass(ed) bills banning community-run broadband. Free Pass shows a map breakdown of the states while Tallahassee.com takes a look at a newly proposed bill in Florida, backed by Sprint, BellSouth, Verizon, and Comcast, designed to bog down the muni-development process."
Re:That's funny (Score:2, Informative)
Re:That's funny (Score:2, Informative)
Re:this is nothing new (Score:4, Informative)
rather strong legislation for Texas (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.freepress.net/communityinternet/=TXbil
Under the bill, municipalities and municipal electric utilities would be prohibited from providing, directly or indirectly, alone or in partnership with other service providers, either "telecommunications" or "information" services as those terms are defined under federal law.
Re:I don't understand (Score:3, Informative)
This isn't stopping Communities!!! (Score:5, Informative)
It's stopping local governments from doing it!
My experience with municipal broadband (Score:5, Informative)
Phone costs $10.50/mo per line.
Basic Cable costs $5.00/mo
3Mbit/sec broadband costs $27.50/mo.
Not to mention some of the lowest electric rates in the state.
The reason we did this was because the local cable company had spent decades gouging on the prices on cable and having crappy service and we finally had enough of it and built our own system.
Mediacom still is around, but now charging fair prices. This municipal effort INCREASED COMPETITION, breaking the monopoly the phone and cable companies enjoyed for so many years.
I'm a firm believer in Municipal Utilities, if you have the chance to write a letter to your congresspeople by all means do it now.
Re:Business kills (Score:4, Informative)
Had this been applied to electricity... (Score:3, Informative)
We wouldn't have had the TVA, BPA and Rural electrification. Many rural areas would probably still be without electricity.
Interestingly enough, the Bush admin wants to get rid of the BPA (Bonneville Power Admin) that runs the dams in the Northwest. Doing so will amount to a 30% rate increase for electric customers in the Northwest. So much for the free market...
Larry says... (Score:3, Informative)
1.) This legislation is despicable.
2.) Don't take my word for it. Listen to Prof. Lessig's first podcast [lessig.org] for a thoroughly considered explanation of why this is not in our best interest.
Re:That's funny (Score:3, Informative)
In Brighton here in the UK, the wireless scene is pretty thriving. We have a few little orgs that provide totally free access. The first, http://wireless.looseconnection.com/ provides access in various cafes and pubs, and another, http://www.piertopier.net/ provides access all along the main part of the beach(!). There's also a few more places providing some in public gardens etc.
It's all free and very well maintained.
And yes, bristol has a great free W network going all the way down park street. I used to live there.
Re:My experience with municipal broadband (Score:3, Informative)
Single phone line: $40 (verizon)
Basic Digital TV Package: 80$/m (adeplhia...)
3/256 Cable Modem: 50$/m.
There's simply no other choices in my community.
Oregon Municipal Broadband (Score:2, Informative)
This pending bill places some crippling roadblocks in the way of municipal broadband for Oregon. It would require municipalities to have a majority vote in a referendum before providing any such service and would subject the proposed municipal communications providers to open records and open meetings requirements that do not apply to private-sector providers.
Requirements like those are just the Oregon way. I've lived in many places, and Oregon by far has the most politically active citizenry. While on the surface such requirements may seem appealing in order to protect Oregonians, they might just be the sugar coating a poison pill for municipal wifi.
The bill also calls for a cost-benefit analysis to be done at the end of three years. Three years is a very short time to see a return on investment. And the process detailed by HB 2445 would need to be repeated for each municipality as the network expands. This sounds like a long and tedious process. By the time anything can be done, the technology to disseminate network connectivity will have changed multiple times.
Mike.
http://injoke.org
Re:this is nothing new (Score:5, Informative)
I trust my local government that I can talk to anytime I feel like it more than I trust a company that most likely doesn't even have a local office let alone someone I can talk to at a whim.
& except for the case of Philly most community broadband is setup by small area not getting serviced by the big companies. Which is exactly where I am. I live in a town of 5000, 6000 if you include the farmers til halfway to the next group of towns. I can see my mayor at my local grocery store or bar... Or even a step further I can visit him at his home. Same with any of the city council members.
Want to talk to Verizon (who 'owns' the local phoen lines and 'sometimes' offers DSL)? Well that's gonna be a 30 mile drive to the biggest city in the region. Then you can talk to a peon behind the billing desk, because no one else will talk to you...
So uh yeah when I can personally smack the mayor upside the head for being a dumbass or a company where I can't even talk to anyone above a receptionist... Well I'll take the local government thanks.
Re:That's funny (Score:3, Informative)
Even if that means killing all the Jews! How enlightened you are!
I'm not taking issue with the Europe vs. America stance, because I'm staying in the UK at the moment, and Blair is trying to force through new legislation that overturns the right to a trial. But you picked a bad example because most of Germany (which I must guess you are talking about) had no idea what was happening. Nor would they have been in favour of it. It was the exact opposite of the government doing what the people wanted.
Now back on-topic: what possible gloss are the corporations putting on these laws to spin them to the public. There must be something, however implausible.
Re:Does anyone else out there (Score:3, Informative)
Those books are open. And, in my experience, there is never any lack of picky people complaining. Private corps, by comparison, can hide any level of profit, gouging, or executive largess behind their closed books. And they can ignore any complaints.
If it's like any other government service, it will be poorly and insecurely run, slow to respond (for instance, blocking ports to stem the spread of viruses), and twice as expensive as anything else. (Amtrak, anyone?)
If Amtrak tickets are more expensive than other modes, perhaps this is because there are fewer hidden tax dollars funding it.
2004 U.S. Department of Transportation [findlaw.com] 54.5 billion
Aviation 13.8 billion (25%)
Highways 33.9 billion (62%)
Railroad 1.45 billion (2.7%)
Other 5.35 (10%)
This doesn't even begin to address the local and state monies that go into roads and airports.
Where governments have actually done broadband, the results have been good. All the reasons given to stop govts doing this smell of FUD.
Re:this is nothing new (Score:2, Informative)
for a buisness to roll out services to a small group of people (5000 is small to a large corporation), it has to be profitable. all those and all 5000 are not necessarily going to want or need said service, especially in a small town.
for example, the cell phone deal. those cell towers they will have to probably place multiple of cost ALOT of money. and they have to buy the land to put them on and run cable to them and upkeep them, etc. then maybe, 10%? of your town MIGHT decide to get service, well, 500 people is nothing. nothing. they make no profit there, they end up WAY in the hole.
but when it's community run, everyone in the community could add a local sales tax addition for example, then the town (on land it already owns) can roll out the services and everyone can receive them. maybe no the best quality, and definitely won't be fixed/repaired as fast or as good of customer service but it will be provided.
all in all i think it should be the local government/people's choice whether or not to go with community driven or corporate driven.
if they want corporate later on? that's fine, the cable is already laid and they can use that to bug the corporate people into just switching over their services.
Write your state reps (Score:3, Informative)
I'm in Illinois, on the danger list. Here's what I wrote to my State Senator. Feel free to use any part of this text if you wish.
Dear Senator Raoul:
I am writing to request that you take action on the amendment concerning municipal provision of communications services to Senate Bill 499. It is very important that this amendment be prevented from becoming law. The offensive text of the amendment reads as follows:
This amendment represents a spectacular example of public corruption, in which the public interest is sacrificed to curry favor with large telecommunications companies. These companies are determined to stamp out municipal provision of broadband services so as to preserve the near-monopolies they so notoriously abuse, and apparently are prepared to lavishly endow with campaign contributions any legislators who are willing to assist them.Note that this draconian legislative proposal would prevent municipalities from constructing their own broadband networks even in poor and rural areas that are under-served by the telecom industry, and that might obtain substantial economic benefits by investing in their own network infrastructure.
Note also that since there are currently several other states that have passed, or are in the process of passing similar legislation at the behest of the telecom industry, a competitive advantage will likely flow from those states to states that do not hog-tie their own citizens to prevent them from building their own high-tech infrastructure at the expense of their own tax dollars.
This piece of legislation is a scandal and an outrage. It is as if a waste management company had bribed legislators to forbid municipalities from building their own sewers or operating their own garbage trucks. I intend to track this issue very closely indeed, as it is a very high priority for me. I am certain that there are many other technology-savvy voters in this district who feel the same way.
Best Regards etc.
Re:you lose (Score:3, Informative)
When the argument revolves around the benevolence and socially progresssive thinking of Europeans, when a significant portion of recent history was dominated by actual Nazi Europeans (Germany) or de facto collaborators (France), Godwin's Law doesn't apply.
In other words, it's not a strawman argument when it actually is a man's suit stuffed with straw and tied to a pole.