Missouri The Latest State To Let Telecom Monopolies Write Awful, Protectionist State Law

from the protectionist-drivel dept

21 states have passed laws hamstringing the rights of local communities when it comes to improving broadband infrastructure. Usually dressed up as breathless concern about the taxpayer -- these bills have one purpose: protect the telecom mono/duopoly status quo -- and the campaign contributions it represents -- from the will of the people. Countless towns and cities have built their own next-generation networks, usually because nobody else would. But these bills, usually ghost written by ISPs for politicians with ALEC's help, either ban locals from making this decision for themselves, or saddle these operations with enough restrictions to make them untenable.

Missouri's just the latest state to either pass a new protectionist bill, or update old laws so they're more restrictive. Like many of these bills SB 186 does its best to impose all manner of restrictions on towns and cities looking to bring better broadband to under-served state communities. SB 186 is actually the third time in as many years that incumbent ISPs have tried to pass expanded community broadband restrictions. Last year, a similar Missouri bill got "unwanted" attention when AT&T got a lawmaker to try and bury it in an unrelated traffic proposal.

Like the last few iterations, SB 186 words itself in such a way to avoid the impression of an outright community broadband "ban," even if that's effectively what it is. Usually this is done by stating a community can't build and operate a broadband network if an existing provider already services the area, intentionally ignoring the fact that said "existing provider" is usually a fat and lazy telco trying to sell users 2002-era 3 Mbps DSL speeds at next-generation prices. SB 186 also saddles these operations with all manner of restrictions on how these networks can be funded, marketed, and expanded.

Often, the bills require a protracted additional public comment period, during which deep-pocketed lobbyists use push polls and other disinformation to convince locals that community broadband is one step up from devil worship, even if it's really just an organic reaction to telecom market failure. The history of these disinformation efforts goes back decades, with ISPs resorting to push polls with questions implying that taxpayer funds would be used for pornography, and government would ration your TV usage.

Should the networks actually get built, they'll then often face incumbent ISP lawsuits. When said lawsuits inevitably saddle these local efforts with delays and added costs, ISPs are quick to point to the problems they caused as proof positive that community broadband doesn't work. But community broadband is like any business plan: if the plan itself is sound, the network succeeds (as is the case in places like Chattanooga, Tennessee).

Historically, most of the twenty-one protectionist state laws have been passed quietly with minimal controversy, in large part thanks to an either misinformed or apathetic public. But as companies like Google and Ting have more recently attempted to disrupt the telecom market, reporters have highlighted not only the lack of broadband competition -- but the protectionist laws responsible for keeping things that way. Last month, Google, Netflix and Ting fired off a letter to Missouri lawmakers (pdf) highlighting the absurdity of such laws:

"SB 186 would amount to a virtual ban on local choice, harming both the public and private sectors, stifling economic growth, preventing the creation or retention of jobs around the State, particularly in rural areas, hampering work-force development, and diminishing the quality of life in Missouri.

In particular, SB 186 will hurt the private sector by derailing or unnecessarily complicating and delaying public-private partnerships, by interfering with the ability of private companies to make timely sales of equipment and services to public broadband providers, by denying private companies timely access to advanced networks over which they can offer business and residential customers an endless array of modern products and services, and by impairing economic and educational opportunities that contribute to a skilled workforce from which businesses across the state will benefit."

The companies also point out that, hey, maybe local infrastructure decisions should be left up to locals, not AT&T, Comcast, CenturyLink and other ISP lawyers and lobbyists with a vested interest in turf protection:

"These are fundamentally local decisions that should be made by the communities themselves, through the processes that their duly elected and accountable local officials ordinarily use for making comparable decisions. They should also be able to use their own resources as they deem appropriate to foster economic development, educational opportunity, public safety, and much more, without having to comply with the restrictive bottlenecks that SB 186 would impose."

ISPs seriously worried about towns and cities getting into the broadband business could have pre-empted these efforts by offering better service at better prices. But given the pay-to-play nature of most state legislatures, it's much easier to just throw money at politicians, who'll happily throw the public interest -- and their state's economic welfare -- in the toilet to fund their next election campaign.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    jupiterkansas (profile), 23 Feb 2017 @ 7:29am

    Ed Emery's top five campaign donors in 2008:

    Ameren
    AT&T
    Sprint Nextel
    Union Pacific Railroad
    The Missouri Cable Telecommunications Association

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    OldMugwump (profile), 23 Feb 2017 @ 7:43am

    States are the battleground

    Most of the reasons the US has lousy broadband (and in many places no Internet at all - not even 3G) are to be found in state legislatures.

    This isn't new - all the focus on the FCC and net neutrality has distracted a lot of people from this fact for a long time.

    Maybe a silver lining in Ajit Pai's chairmanship of the FCC is that the focus will return to the states, which is where the real problem was in the first place.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Feb 2017 @ 8:09am

      Re: States are the battleground

      Yeah, those states will fix everything.
      Been paying that fee for decades and yet rural phone lines still suck - go figure.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      jupiterkansas (profile), 23 Feb 2017 @ 2:26pm

      Re: States are the battleground

      Nobody pays attention to state politics. That's why they want the states to have more power.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Bergman (profile), 26 Feb 2017 @ 12:52pm

      Re: States are the battleground

      What I'm wondering, is how would a protectionist law prohibiting municipalities from competing with a private high speed internet provider interact with the FCC redefining what high speed internet is?

      After all, if the local provider only does 3 Mbps and anything under 25 is not high speed internet...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Feb 2017 @ 8:07am

    Love it when they call themselves lawmakers .... too funny.

    Rubber stamp pounderz is more like it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Giles Byles, 23 Feb 2017 @ 10:52am

    Slip across the border to my little corner of Kansas & we've got 100 up & 100 down.

    You can have up to a gig if you want to pay for it.

    optic-communications.com

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Feb 2017 @ 2:38pm

    so call out the 'politician involved' and get him/her to answer the reasons why they are backing the ISPs/telecos and throwing their electorate under the bus/ then sack the fuckers!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Mononymous Tim (profile), 23 Feb 2017 @ 3:26pm

    Last year, a similar Missouri bill got "unwanted" attention when AT&T got a lawmaker to try and bury it in an unrelated traffic proposal.

    Awe.. the poor babies got caught in the act! I don't understand how that crap is allowed to happen. Anything like that is clearly meant to deceive.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Dennis Fahlstrom, 24 Feb 2017 @ 7:42pm

    Broadband

    This is one more example of politicians being bought and paid for. It's an abomination that the country that invented the internet now ranks badly behind many other countries who came to the dance long ago but realized the real value of the internet in education, commerce, law and so many other disciplines. Countries like South Korea had almost no internet at all in 1995 and now have systems everywhere that are 3 MB/sec higher. They see it as a national resource to be invested in while the USA looks on it as only a source of profit for a few investors. Imagine if our same US ISP's had the say in whether or not we had rural electricity. If they did, most American rural areas would still be without electricity and our farm output would be a fraction of what it is today. We need to wake up. I live in an area where the only decent internet access is via satellite and is very expensive. This country has nearly 50% of it's area that is only getting dial up or relies on overpriced satellite. We can and should do much better. It's in all our interests to do so.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 25 Feb 2017 @ 4:58pm

      Re: Broadband

      You better start financing politicians then as money talks, however the amount of money that the telcos/ISPs spend on bribing politicians shouts the loudest.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.