You have 3 more choices than I do then, living in one of the largest markets in the US (Dallas-Fort Worth).
Additionally, the Swedish model is simultaneously a monopoly and not a monopoly. The infrastructure is provided by the government, but the service is provided by any of a multitude of companies. Personally I think this model is ideal and wish it would be adopted more here in the US. I don't care if the network is owned by a government or highly regulated monopoly, I just think separating service and infrastructure makes sense. It's exactly how we handle our power today where I live. Oncor runs all of the infrastructure, and I get to pick whichever power company I choose. I want that, but for Internet.