My good buddies at Free Press have have created a page on the Sessions bill. As I mentioned last time, that’s the bill that would make it illegal for municipalities to provide new broadband, cable or telecom networks that compete with any private offerings.
As Free Press discovered, Mr. Sessions has about $500K in SBC stock options. Understandable that he might get upset if SBC had to _gasp_ compete for a living.
So take a minute to visit the Free Press site. Among other things, it has a simple way for you to tell your Congresscritter that you, unlike Mr. Sessions, would like to see competition in the broadband market.
Related Posts:
- S. Korea "Sender Pays" Is a Warning, Not a Model, or Why (Almost) Everyone Keeps Telling the EU This Is a VERY Bad Idea. by Harold October 14, 2022 Economist/NYT opinion writer Paul Krugman coined the term "Zombie idea" to describe an idea that, despite being repeatedly refuted with evidence, keeps coming back. Not…
- Why Canada's C-18 Isn't Working Out As Expected. by Harold July 24, 2023 Back at the end of June, Canada passed C-18, aka "The Online News Act," a law designed to make Google and Facebook negotiate with news…
- What is the FCC's Role in Artificial Intelligence? by Harold July 17, 2023 There are two types of public events here in DC. Those designed to actually educate people and those designed so that folks can display their…
- AI Policy and the Uncanny Valley Freakout. by Harold June 30, 2023 We have been debating, on and off, about the issues around artificial intelligence and AI governance for some time now. Here at Public Knowledge, we…
- My Insanely Long Field Guide to the Fox29 Philadelphia (WTFX-TV) License Renewal Challenge. by Harold August 29, 2023 In July, the Media and Democracy Project filed a Petition to Deny the license renewal of Fox29 (WTFX-TV) in Philadelphia. The Petition rests on a…
- Gonzales v. Google Validates My Theory of Legislative Drafting -- Be Really, Really Detailed and Longwinded. by Harold February 15, 2023 Every now and then, I do some legislative drafting. I tend to get pushback on my habit of including a bunch of legislative findings and…
I signed the petition, thanks. Now let’s spread the word.
That does sound like a conflict of interest, but it doesn’t address the basic issue. I want to see competition in telecommunications markets, and that means keeping municipalities from using their tax-supported and politically connected status to become advantaged competitors or outright monopolists.
From my slight understanding of the bill, my only objection to it is that it doesn’t keep municipalities out of the telecom business entirely.
Actually, it does to the extent they are not grandfathered or if there is no one in the vicinity that provides a “comparable service.”
I’ve never believed that private monopolies or even duopolies are inherently superior to competition from local government. WRT the competition and subsidy issue, I will observe that the only emprical studies come out the other way (i.e., that existing incumbents enjoy large regulatory advantages and subsidies as opposed to local governments). You can find them at http://www.freepress.net/