dslreports logo
Anti-Muni Bills Country Wide
14 states have bans, many more considering
Free Press offers a map breakdown of which states have passed bills banning community-run broadband, and which states are currently considering it. 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.
view:
topics flat nest 

Gokou2k3
join:2003-08-05
Las Vegas, NV

Gokou2k3

Member

Stupid

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of, why shouldn't a community be able to run their own broadband? They have ever right to if the cable and phone companies are too lazy to offer their broadband services to these communities.

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

2 recommendations

sbrook

Mod

Re: Stupid

I pledge allegiance to the corporations of the United States of America and to the monopolies for which they stand, one nation under owners, with liberty and justice for those with the big $$$$$$$$$$$$

RR Conductor
Ridin' the rails
Premium Member
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA

RR Conductor

Premium Member

Re: Stupid

Hey, that' Gwbuh's pledge!

Megadeth5150
Big in Japan
Premium Member
join:2004-12-31
Japan Inc.

Megadeth5150 to Gokou2k3

Premium Member

to Gokou2k3
Welcome to USA.

Corvus
Flaming Tards Since 2003
Premium Member
join:2003-11-26

Corvus

Premium Member

Re: Stupid

said by Megadeth5150:

Welcome to USA.
Yeah, land of the free eh?
Plldwnyrpnts
join:2003-04-19
Chicago, IL

Plldwnyrpnts

Member

Re: Stupid

Imagine a government controlled line a communication. Do you think you'd be free?

I thought about this for quite some time and it didn't really dawn on me until someone else said it. FREE.

Anything that is government controlled will soon find itself completely useless with nothing but the most imposing restrictions the government can throw at you. Because the government is in charge of your safety, they will use that as an excuse to ban or disallow what THEY feel is inappropriate or inflammatory. Are you seeing your freedom of speech slowly sucked away from you? Imagine a town in the bible belt running it's own fiber? Do you think there will be just a tad bit a brain washing? Lack of information leads to a whole helluva lot of ignorance.

I do understand the whole monopoly issue surrounding the big companies and they're ideas of when and how and why they will or will not lay down fiber. And yes it sucks. But imagine finding yourself in a town where the majority of the folks think what you want to use internet access for is morally degrading. Sound useful? Sure some towns won't be as anal with the access. But what happens when one does?

I just can't help but be afraid of muni-band. Smells good, but how's it taste?

Corvus
Flaming Tards Since 2003
Premium Member
join:2003-11-26

Corvus

Premium Member

Re: Stupid

I live in Canada, we've got the CRTC, a government board not allowing this kind of thing and cracking Bells and cable companies monopoly since 10 years and yes, it works.
damox
Premium Member
join:2002-01-07
Olympia, WA

1 edit

damox to Plldwnyrpnts

Premium Member

to Plldwnyrpnts
Excuse me . . . but these municipalities are only providing the infrastructure, not the content! Now if the carriers owned both the cable and the TV stations, or even a majority thereof, that would be different! In that case, it wouldn't matter whether it was owned by the government or by private industry, the potential for limiting the freedom of ideas would be the same!

lyls
@adsl.tele.dk

lyls to Plldwnyrpnts

Anon

to Plldwnyrpnts
uhm it isnt exactly like if they dont ban muni broadband that private corporations cant move in... i REALLY dont see how you could think banning it is a good idea

z
@61-203-24.mc.videotr

z to Plldwnyrpnts

Anon

to Plldwnyrpnts
I'd rather take my chances with muni-band. When something is run by the gov't, you can at least kick them out through reform or voting process - with a corporate monopoly, there is no such opportunity. 'Vote with your dollars' only really works when there's some healthy competition, and there may not necessarily be any in the area.

bluecanvas
@172.16.x.x

bluecanvas to Plldwnyrpnts

Anon

to Plldwnyrpnts
You're right. Imagine, for example, the government controlled your water. They could put anything they wanted in it. How could we trust them?

The reality is that, after some thrashing, we have boards which oversee this sort of thing. And while that adds to cost, it's cheaper to allow everything than to filter and block. And if they DO filter and block in a way you don't like, you have some power -- you can actually get a say (by voting, or protesting, etc.) in a way you don't with a corporation -- especially one with a monopoly.

Right now, these folks have nothing, and believe me, whatever the ILECs promise, they'll still have nothing for years, because based on the costs for a heavy, slow monopoly, and the profit margins expected in a monopoly telco, there's no reason at ALL to give a lot of these people anything.

If it's a choice between "fight for your right with the local government", or "get nothing", the fight scenario clearly wins.

bk425
@sea1.dsl.speakeasy.n

bk425

Anon

Re: Stupid

"You're right. Imagine, for example, the government controlled your water. They could put anything they wanted in it. How could we trust them?"

How ironic, have you heard the stories about heavy metals in the water in San Diego? Perhaps you don't know that there are people who buy bottled water (or filters) to remove the flouride and chlorine used in most municipal systems...

Noneatall
@80-202-45.nextgentel

Noneatall to Plldwnyrpnts

Anon

to Plldwnyrpnts
Ever heard of .. encryption ? Proxies ? Tunneling ?

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

sbrook to Plldwnyrpnts

Mod

to Plldwnyrpnts
What's the difference between government by elected officials and government by monopolistic corporations?

The danger of allowing corporations too much freedom is that they become more controlling of our day to day lives than our government.

As it is today, corporations have the elected officials in their pockets, so there is no difference whatsoever. Nobody is looking out for your or me.

The free market idea sounds great ... take your business elsewhere ... sure ... and as we speak one big business is swallowing another ... so your business ends up back in the hands of the one you took it away from ... or one that looks no different in the bottom line.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

3 recommendations

Skippy25 to Gokou2k3

Member

to Gokou2k3
My personal opinion from a posting to a discussion earlier (to avoid a long drawn out typing again).

I personally want to see a tax and/or bond subsidized nationwide fiber network to every home and office building in the country implemented by the government. I would then like to see a governmental body personally responsible for the leasing, upgrading, and maintenance of this network either directly or through 1 or 2 companies that answer to it.

That's right. 1 line to my house that any service provider I choose can use by simply leasing it from one of the above mentioned. If I want to use SBC for local service so be it, if I want Verizon so be it. If I want Phil's Phone Service and Tackle Shop of Phoenix because I hear how great they are, then so be it. There should not be a single restriction to my choice or to the ability in getting me my choice.

And guess what, the marginal amount of money I spend on any tax hike would be saved exponentially through true competition. If not in pure dollars then it would be through my happiness with the providers I choose and not the ones the highly restricted market does.

I think one of those articles about muni’s hits it dead on the head. Your local incumbents, cable or phone, are not so concerned with muni’s costing communities tax money. They couldn’t care less as they are concerned with protecting their monopolistic markets. Do you think they really care if your taxes go up a few cents for a project that may fail? How many other times have you heard of them whining about this when it was another worthless government project not competing with them but wasting millions in taxes?

In reality it would actually benefit them if these failed. They could then purchase preinstalled fiber for pennies on the dollar and yet they “fear” them because it may waste a few of your tax dollars. Instead they spend millions of dollars trying to get people like you afraid of them as well. Give me a break, in the long run nothing but good will come of any government sponsored broadband project, even in the unlikely event that they fail.

AnonGuy
@kodak.com

AnonGuy

Anon

Re: Stupid

There are just too many things wrong with this:

1. There's no way the government would get this thing right from the beginning. Politicians would pork-barrel the hell out of this and specify a poor technical solution in the bill.

2. Once the wrong solution gets implemented, it wouldn't ever get corrected... We'd have to live with this country-wide screw-up for decades.

3. Because everyone would be dependent on this government-monopolized communications solution, every legislative politician would tax the living hell out of it whenever they went looking for another place to scrape up some money. The taxed companies that would provide service to you would pass the buck on to you in turn. And before you cry "regulated rates", if companies can't make a profit from services they sell you because of overly stringent regulated rates, they'll find other ways to make that money from you (directly or indirectly), or they get out of the business. No competition, no consumer benefit, more money out of your wallet one way or another.

Now, before I introduce an example of how bad a technical mandate from the government is, I'll admit that this is not a perfect comparison, but it is close enough to make the point: ISDN. The FCC mandated that ISDN be implemented by such-and-such a date (too lazy to look it up). By the time the installation of the supporting infrastructure was to be completed, DSL was in its infancy but already appeared to be the winning technology. But we had to foot the bill in rate increases to offset the wasteful, loss-laden ISDN ramp-up. It wasn't so much of a loss to the telcos; they were nicely reimbursed by consumers. And we suffered a delay in DSL's rise; resources were being poured into ISDN thanks to the technically inept politicians' decree.
AnonGuy

AnonGuy

Anon

Re: Stupid

Sorry, the above post was to reference Skippy25's socialized communications remark.

AnotherAnon
@172.21.x.x

AnotherAnon to AnonGuy

Anon

to AnonGuy
If you think the US airlines worked great (and prices were cheaper) before regulation; If you think the US telecom world was better when there was only AT&T; If you like standing in line at the Dept. of Motor Vehicles; If you agree with the phrase "I'm with the Government and I'm here to help you" then this is a good idea. It's socialist vs. capitalist ideology. I know which one works better.
brisonic
join:2001-08-05
San Diego, CA

brisonic to Skippy25

Member

to Skippy25
Looking at this, are you friggin serious?
I personally want to see a tax and/or bond subsidized nationwide fiber network to every home and office building in the country implemented by the government. I would then like to see a governmental body personally responsible for the leasing, upgrading, and maintenance of this network either directly or through 1 or 2 companies that answer to it.

This would almost certainly have a cost in the billions to get to EVERY home.

Besides, non gov't sponsored wifinets are popping up all over the place, see »socalfreenet.org as an example.

vd853
join:2004-12-29
Brooklyn, NY

1 edit

vd853 to Gokou2k3

Member

to Gokou2k3
THis is just another block to the normal individual get the rich basters richer.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd to Gokou2k3

Premium Member

to Gokou2k3
probally tastes fine, unless your downloading pirate movies. i know that i could probally play my MMOs on pretty much any broadband connection.
bigalsbeans9
join:2005-02-28
Independence, MO

bigalsbeans9 to Gokou2k3

Member

to Gokou2k3
But where do you draw the line for what areas of business that governments' can enter at taxpayer expense? I could see having a municipal broadband system if there is no other option or if there are major service issues there, but if those are not the case, why get the government into it. There are government run utilities, such as power and water, but why broadband? Not sure this is the answer.

Given that many municipal governments are not exactly smooth running machines, not sure its a good idea.
fdiaz78
join:2005-01-22
Naples, FL

1 recommendation

fdiaz78

Member

WHAT!

How is this not considered govermental abuse and corruption? What possible benefit does banning communities from developing their broadband options. Wow, just wow.
sancraig
join:2003-11-05
Saint Louis, MO

sancraig

Member

LOL

I could just see if the my state tried to do there own OMG would be nothing but corruption and over budget news for years. Sure glad my state is gray

DaSneaky1D
what's up
MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou

DaSneaky1D

MVM

Re: LOL

Dude, it's illegal for local governments to provide their own telecom services in MO. They don't need any further wording or laws here.
Damon85
Premium Member
join:2004-12-25
Houston, TX

Damon85

Premium Member

Gimme-Gimme...

They want the government to subsidize their expansion into those remote areas, because it makes them money.

If the community rolls out the broadband, then the taxes the corporations pay are practically subsidizing the broadband for the municipality, and they lose money.

It's a standard human-nature complaint (I-want-more-than-you), they just have enough money and resources to have it written into law.

Have we all forgotten? Sprellzoncast knows what's best for us all...

tonyfer2
join:2002-08-14
Elizabeth, NJ

tonyfer2

Member

Re: Gimme-Gimme...

that that in the u.s.of.a
Jim_in_VA (banned)
join:2004-07-11
Cobbs Creek, VA

Jim_in_VA (banned)

Member

But ILECS could care less in rural areas

SO!!!!! If the Verizons of the world will NOT offer broadband in your rural community. Then it seems openwide for the local government to offer it. SCREW VERIZON!

rawgerz
The hell was that?
Premium Member
join:2004-10-03
Grove City, PA

1 edit

rawgerz

Premium Member

yikes

im surprised to see PA mentioned so often, theres practically nothing here, as i look outside in this hilly terrain i can see 4-7 cell towers all verizon. id like to know whats stopping them from taking a fiber line, hooking it up to a tower, and offering wireless to everyone
they must just love to see us suffer
"can you hear me now?" nope im not picking up the damn phone again

Gokou2k3
join:2003-08-05
Las Vegas, NV

Gokou2k3

Member

Re: yikes

said by rawgerz:

im surprised to see PA mentioned so often, theres practically nothing here, as i look outside in this hilly terrain i can see 4-7 cell towers all verizon. id like to know whats stopping them from taking a fiber line, hooking it up to a tower, and offering wireless to everyone
they must just love to see us suffer
"can you hear me now?" nope im not picking up the damn phone again
It makes no sense, luckily after spending four years here we finally got DSL back in March from SBC after suffering for so many years.

rawgerz
The hell was that?
Premium Member
join:2004-10-03
Grove City, PA

rawgerz

Premium Member

Re: yikes

verizons solution to all the phone lines around here is to use "digitals" on the lines, so as to split two or more people on the same line. with all the frequent lightning strikes here in the summer and spring their our line has been repaired over 12 times in 2 years since i guess from what the installers said was that those things cant take any amount of power surge
Soundfx4
join:2005-02-08
Roanoke, VA

Soundfx4

Member

That is exactly what I have been saying

I have been calling the US telcos greedy SOBs since the start, but believe it or not, there are people that (for whatever insane reason they may have) defend large greedy corporations.
Taget
join:2004-07-29

Taget

Member

Nothing new...

Same guys were able to get laws passed to harass RSN when they tried wiring areas up (with the help of some of the gas companies).

It's all about monopoloy *cough* *cough* I meant free competition.

OceanaJones
join:2004-10-18
Suffolk, VA

OceanaJones

Member

The funny thing is

When I read the Constitution of the United States of America, it states "We the People" not "We the People, corporations and special interest". Our founding fathers interest lay in the voice and the power of all the "people of our nation". Since then, greedy, sleazy lawyer, businessmen politicians, only give an ear to the voices of big money,big corporations and special interest. There is not a politician on the local, state, or federal level that gives a fat rat's ass for the individual taxpayer. We the People have been left out of the loop in these decisions. And there in lies the problem. Where are our elected advocates? So much for freedom! Where in the Constitution does it say big business, or corporations can have a larger roll in my government than "We The People"? It's not in there.

••••••••••••

Penguins3
Have You Played Atari Today?
join:2001-12-01
Cleveland, OH

Penguins3

Member

We all know comminity projects are COMMUNIST PLOTS

Haven't you read your republican talking points people?

Using the peoples money for the benefit of the people is now 'communist and socialist'. Giving the peoples money and freedom of choice to corporations is 'patriotic'.

Get with the program!

brisonic
join:2001-08-05
San Diego, CA

brisonic

Member

Re: We all know comminity projects are COMMUNIST P

Well thing is, everyone wants free wifi access. But, somewhere, someone is apying for this bandwidth. It shouldn't be free, inexpensive certainly as bandwidth costs plummet but free no way.

RR Conductor
Ridin' the rails
Premium Member
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA

RR Conductor to Penguins3

Premium Member

to Penguins3

Re: We all know comminity projects are COMMUNIST PLOTS

Welcome to the United States of Bush and Cheney

digiblur
Premium Member
join:2002-06-03
Louisiana

digiblur

Premium Member

Muni's are good!

Hopefully this one will be in my area soon.. so I can get rid of Cox. They still can't fix the problem of the idiot down the street shutting down the entire node with his CB radio.

»www.eatel.com/newsDetail ··· fm?aid=1

••••••
Ellery
join:2001-01-10
Rome, GA

Ellery

Member

My View.

I own a small wireless ISP and read over thease acts to make sure it would not cause me any issues. All of them limit the City or county from installing Wireless networks without offering the Telco frist. not Small busnesses. or groups. maybe i read it wrong.

Ellery

jonmines
join:2003-11-10
Seattle, WA

jonmines

Member

Map is wrong.

Funny thing, Washington is listed on that map a restricted state yet Mason County PUD offers fiber access to the home and has a nice sized co-location facility.

•••

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

Too bad it can't be a national ban

It would be wonderful if the federal government had the authority to ban government-backed networks of any kind. With states and cities wasting so much money on stupid things like stadiums and other give-aways, its amazing that there's any money left at all to pay for what's really important.

JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium Member
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD

JTRockville

Premium Member

Re: Too bad it can't be a national ban

Not sure what point you're trying to make, pnh102 See Profile.

Are you suggesting there should be a ban on the stupid things like stadiums and give-aways, so local governments can focus on important things like infrastructure (networks)?

Or are you saying local governments should be banned from providing infrastructure, so they can have money to spend on stadiums and give-aways?
damox
Premium Member
join:2002-01-07
Olympia, WA

damox to pnh102

Premium Member

to pnh102
Why should you want to make it national? Don't you think that the people of each municipality could decide for themselves whether they want to have their own telecommunications network? What do you care about what goes on in my state since it doesn't affect you?
damox

damox

Premium Member

Private Internet Service Providers are Winning!

Unfortunately, it looks like private ISPs are winning the war against competition! That's a cryin' shame that they can get away with it! I have to wonder how many politicians are receiving money under the table! IMO, if a municipality wants to provide Internet Service for their citizens, they ought to be able to do so If it turns out that such a venture is not competitive, then they will fold. At least it's an alternative to cable and telephone giants. Here in Washington, if you eliminate munis, there really is no competition . . . it's just Comcast!

Phil_at_evilnet
@63.84.x.x

Phil_at_evilnet

Anon

I almost panicked until I saw this...

Being from Indiana, I was dismayed when I saw my state as one of the followers, then I read this:

Indiana
UPDATE: On Feb. 16, the Local Government Committee killed House Bill 1148. The bill, championed by SBC Communications, would have prohibited Indiana cities and towns from providing municipal broadband services.


Now I can say with confidence, that miracles do happen.

belarm
@199.8.x.x

belarm

Anon

Re: I almost panicked until I saw this...

Now I can say with confidence, that miracles do happen.

Indiana law-makers making an informed decision that benefits the people? Maybe there is a god, afterall...

anon_name
@llbean.com

1 recommendation

anon_name

Anon

Rural Electrification

The parallels between this emerging saga, and the push in the 30's for rural electrification (TVA, etc.) are quite striking.

It seems that there ought to be some learnings from those initiatives and earlier battles involving government sanctioned monopolies vs. rurual cooperatives that could be employed here.

Unfortunately, we lack anyone like FDR in the white house who would champion this.

RR Conductor
Ridin' the rails
Premium Member
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA

RR Conductor

Premium Member

Re: Rural Electrification

I couldn't have said it better myself!

anonrgr
@210.9.x.x

anonrgr

Anon

good old canada

Seems like canada is just what the usa wants to be, but cant!
execute0
join:2004-12-21
Westlake, OH

execute0

Member

all the stupid people out there

HB 188, would prohibit state and local agencies from providing any electronic communications service that at least two private providers are offering, unless they first meet certain requirements. Before providing such a service, a municipality would have to hold a public hearing and make extensive findings, including initial and lifecycle costs and benefits, per-taxpayer costs, needs that the private sector is not meeting, etc. Bill status.

do you people know that this bill is just protecting companys that offer broadband service. its like how the US regulates who can grow tobacco. all this will do is limit the number of companys able to offer broadband service. you must understand this isnt baning state and local agencys from doing this they just have to provide enough info saying that there is a need for a publicly run company. so dont get mad, be happy that our gov is working to help keep companys from going bankrupt because there are too many people offering services. will you people read the bill before you comment on it. ok people kthx bye