Posted on 05/23/2002 10:00:23 AM PDT by Alan Chapman
U.S. senators are probing what, if anything, can be done to increase the availability and cut the price of broadband service. At the heart of the matter is the question of whether to break up local phone companies in order to promote competition. One bill, proposed by Senate Commerce Committee chairman Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., would do just that, splitting each telco into retail and wholesale arms. Wholesale units would lease high-speed lines to competing Internet service providers. Pennsylvania state Sen. Mary Jo White complained to the commerce committee that a lack of competition has dissuaded Verizon Communications from selling fast, affordable Internet access to her constituents in rural western Pennsylvania. "I remain convinced that structural separation makes sense and is the only way to assure competitors nondiscriminatory access to customer's homes and businesses," she said.
But critics of regulation say customers would be left with more confusing and less reliable service if a breakup occurred. "It would wreak an absolutely massive amount of destruction on the telecommunications sector and the national economy," says Adam Thierer, director of telecom studies for the libertarian think tank the Cato Institute. "It would be gut-wrenching for consumers."
Heh heh... thank goodness for Anconym Finder.
Digital Subscriber Line Access Multiplexer
There is a new company I know of that has just started their first residential rollout for broadband, which as it happens doesn't use the telco last mile (or anywhere in their transcontinental network). They have a 20,000' range also, and for a similar price the smallest service they deliver is 1-Mbit symmetric and they do it at a profit. This is the kind of competition the telcos really need -- there is hope yet.
By this logic, we can assume you'd like the water, electric and gas services removed from your property as well? Maybe you should be the one to move... to the top of some godforsaken mountain in the middle of nowhere... nobody would bother you with those pesky modern conveniences.
No, your assumption is wrong. I stated my position in #15 -
"I favor a reasonable amount of eminent domain powers for utilities, in return for regulations on the utilities that serve the public interest. Requiring the telephone companies to allow competitors to access their facilities is a reasonable tradeoff for eminent domain powers."
I don't favor giving utilities the power of eminent domain without expecting them to make some concessions too. Is that unreasonable?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.