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.
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/