You'll recall that last year, after four years of lobbying by Time Warner Cable and CenturyLink, North Carolina passed a law seriously restricting the right of local communities to wire themselves for broadband -- even if local incumbents wouldn't. Neither Time Warner Cable and CenturyLink are what you'd call aggressive when it comes to upgrading last mile speeds, so the law made sure they wouldn't have to worry about locals getting fed up and say -- building a wholesale fiber ring that then allowed regional ISPs to compete.

Supporters of these bills proclaim they're interested in "leveling the playing field" and "free markets," when in reality they're interested in protecting regional duopolies and ensuring that community network building is immensely cumbersome. Creating a "level playing field" is always code for "creating pricing, funding, deployment and other bureaucratic restrictions private ISPs don't face." Why? If done right, municipal broadband can make lazy duopolists have to actually work for your money, driving down profits. The answer for ISPs? Throw money at lawmakers who'll gleefully work to kill community broadband.

Now Georgia is considering a bill that aims to take broadband-related decision making rights away from local communities while erecting barriers for community broadband. Christopher Mitchell at Community Broadband Networks takes a look at SB 313:

The bill first requires communities to ask the private sector to build the necessary network....The bill requires communities to pass a referendum before building a network and requires inaccurate, damning language be included on the ballot. Broadband referendums tend to invite deep-pocketed incumbent providers to spend heavily to buy the votes necessary to stop competition - see the Longmont saga for an excellent example of how hard it is for a community to stand up to these big cable corporations.

Communities that somehow get this far are then subject to all the regulations as are private providers in addition to numerous additional regulations imposed on them by this legislation and their inherent duty to operate in an open and transparent manner. Despite being nonprofit, they are required to pay taxes and still face additional barriers that private operators do not.

They will be restricted in how they price their services and where they offer services in ways the private sector is not.

As noted, ISPs particularly love bills that require endless public hearings and votes, where deep-pocketed carriers can can out spend supporters by millions of dollars on (often incredibly sleazy) PR campaigns aimed at shouting these services down. That same money could be used to upgrade last mile connectivity, but isn't thanks to the uncompetitive markets these companies are trying to keep uncompetitive. The result? Continued slow speeds, high prices and poor service, all protected by the very government ISPs claim they don't want involved in the market.
read comment(s)

Original story here.

Posted in News
No Comments Yet Posted by Don