Telephony Magazine says advocates of community broadband networks are already planning to fight some segments of Sen. John Ensign s telecom reform legislation and they may have an advocate in one of his co-sponsors.
The Ensign/McCain Broadband Investment and Consumer Choice Act is strongly opposed by municiple wireless advocates because it tends to create a duopoly “walled garden” for telephone and cable operators. Advocates of the bill (mostly telephone companies) say it creates a level playing field and allows them to deliver fiber to the home with video and other services.
Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), former chair of the Commerce Committee, led a charge earlier on behalf of public safety, with his SAVE LIVES bill, S. 1268. McCain said obtaining additional spectrum is essential to providing police, fire and emergency personnel the tools to communicate with one another. He wants the 700 Mhz frequencies that broadcasters are squatting on. It has Intel’s support.
Later, McCain and Lautenberg introduced S-1294 (The Community Broadband act of 2005), to promote or protect local government broadband projects. They pointed out that economic competitors Canada, Korea and Japan, have passed the United States which is now 16th in broadband penetration. It was introduced as way to counteract Texas Representative Pete Sessions bill “Preserving Innovation in Telecom Act of 2005” (HR2726), which attemped to ban virtually all municipal networks, nationwide. That move appears to have failed (for the moment).
But Sen. McCain (R-Ariz.) agreed to co-sponsor Ensign s reform bill, even though it severely limits municipally run broadband networks, says Telephony Magazine. Verizon, and other baby Bells love it.
The Ensign bill would mainly lift regulations on cable, telephone and Internet services. It would allow telephone companies to deliver cable television services without a franchise requirement and also allow phone companies to eliminate DSL competitors. The belief is that it would level the playing field since cable companies don’t have to allow competitors into their cable modem lines.
Under Ensign s plan, Verizon and SBC would not have to get permission from state and local officials to get into the video business.
The legislation, however, does not address who will continue to contribute to the Universal Service Fund, which subsidizes phone service in rural parts of the country. It could face financial shortfalls in the future as fewer long distance phone companies contribute to it. Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) is also working on legislation to shore up the fund.
And there’s the sticky bit about cable television franchises…
According to a McCain staff member, he will continue to back his own measure, introduced last June with Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), that gives municipalities the right to build, own and operate their own networks.
I believe [Ensign s] legislation would promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices and higher quality services for consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of new technologies, said McCain in a prepared statement. While this legislation does offer an alternative approach from the one I have advocated for addressing the municipal broadband issue, I still felt compelled to sign on as an original co-sponsor because I believe the legislation is an excellent step toward deregulating the industry. If we are serious about providing Americans more choices and better technologies, this deregulatory bill provides the framework to do so.McCain added that he looks forward to working with Ensign (R-Nev.) and others to achieve President George W. Bush s goal of universal, affordable access for broadband technology by the year 2007.
We need to study this a little more, said Libby Beaty, executive director of the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisers. Sen. Ensign made it clear he is very concerned about insuring local governments have a role to play. We look forward to working with him on this.
The good news is that Congress is showing an interest in broadband investment and consumer choice, said Joe Savage of the Fiber to the Home Council. We do have a small difference with this bill in that our position is that anyone should be able to build a broadband network if they are willing to pay for it. There s a second difference as well we d like to see some sort of broadband requirements in order to get all the benefits of deregulation.
In fact, the Ensign bill sets the broadband bar very low calling any service over 64 kilobits per second a broadband service.
In addition, off the record, multiple sources within the muni network community said they believe Ensign is setting up an unworkable situation. Of specific concerns to community broadband advocates are the bill s requirements which state that municipalities must not only allow private companies to bid on their broadband networks but also list all of the government s potential advantages such as non-profit status and funding through government bonds and then share those advantages with the private entities. The private entities would then be the preferred provider, if they proceed.
Many are looking to find controversy on the issue of municipal networks, he said. You will not find an extreme policy in this bill. We encourage new investment in communities that may be unserved. We say that if local governments are willing to put up funds, and offer favorable tax treatment and free rights-of-way make those same advantages available to private industry.
If private industry doesn t show up and offer to build we would encourage local governments to go ahead and build their project. In this way, we ensure consumers get new services, but ensure that government isn t competing unfairly, or unnecessarily with private industry.
Attorney Jim Baller of The Baller Herbst Law Group says the conditions established in the Broadband Investment and Consumer Choice Act regarding publicly owned nets are unnecessary, unworkable and counterproductive. Baller represents municipalities seeking to build their own broadband networks including Lafayette (La.) and the UTOPIA project in Utah.
Here is Jim Baller s initial analysis of the bill. The Heartland Institute has a different world view.
Sean Maloney, executive vice president of Intel’s Communications Group, said the company hopes to bring municipalities and telecoms together, rather than fighting each other. An Intel spokesperson noted that legislation similar to the bill passed in Pennsylvania is pending in as many as 17 other states. He called the trend “fairly disturbing”. Independent ISPs also complain they’re being locked out as fiber is installed. When Verizon puts in Fiber to the Home, they take out the twisted pair copper. That makes Verizon the sole provider.
Independent ISPs and phone services may soon have no way “home”. Cable is out. DSL services may soon get similar exclusivity to the phone operator if the FCC’s Kevin Martin gets his way. Unlicensed broadband wireless - at 5.8 GHz - may be their only hope to deliver competitive services in the United States.
From the 1960’s until the day President Bush took office, writes Thomas Bleha, “The United States led the world in Internet development.” In the first three years of the Bush administration, the United States dropped from 4th to 13th place. Now it’s 16th.
In 2001, Robert Crandall, an economist at the Brookings Institution estimated that “widespread” adoption of basic broadband in the United States could add $500 billion to the U.S. economy and produce 1.2 million new jobs.
Tech Law Journal, Baller Herbst Law Group, Civitium, C/Net, Muniwireless, UnwireMyCity and Sascha Meinrath keep tabs on municipal broadband regulation.
.gif)
