Net Neutrality, Municipal Broadband and the Future of Cities
Imagine if 19 million Americans lacked access to electricity. And imagine that number getting much worse in rural America, where a quarter of that population was cut-off from even the most basic levels of electrical service. Imagine in areas where there is access, the cost is such that 100 million people failed to get to subscribe to it, inevitably hitting lower economic individuals the hardest.
Now imagine, when faced with such access and inequity issues, a handful of big electricity providers stood in the way of solutions to fix it. Worse, they convinced politicians and supposed-regulators that “the state of the free market of electricity was doing just fine,” all the while convincing them to impose rules that actually destroyed free market principles by favoring their monopolous practices and stifling greater access, service, innovation, and solutions coming from other sectors.
Imagine that the US, a country that prides itself on being an economic powerhouse, found itself ranking 16th worldwide on penetration, speed, and price of electricity. Imagine that ranking dip deeper to 31st when speed is isolated.
This would be unacceptable. Yet this is the current state of internet broadband in our country. And instead of leading us out of this mess, our politicians and federal regulators are making the problem worse.
Internet broadband is to the 21st century what electricity was to the 20th century.
State leaders are increasingly erecting barriers to entry, innovation, price reductions, and speed by adopting rules prohibiting cities from jumping ahead with municipal broadband and preventing city-led innovation like your see in Chattanooga, TN with their universal Gig fiber roll-out. Texas is one of 20 states which, while claiming to have the best climate for business, is, with its allegiance to the innovation-less big ISPs, actually stifling economic activity in what could be its most promising sector: tech. While cities like Austin and San Antonio are able to attract something like a Google Fiber initiative, most cities will not.
Our national leaders are doing no better. Today, we saw proposed rules pass the FCC which further exasperate this problem by beginning the process of dismantling Net Neutrality. The big providers already control the access and speed of our internet service, these proposed rules now give them control over content and the ability to control which content comes to us at what speed.
In this innovation economy, do we really want to cede control of our most promising innovative tool to gigantic internet providers who, at best, are not interested in helping us move ahead and, at worst, just might have an interest in slowing things down?
Cities are the economic engines of our nation. State and national leaders seem to be teaming up with Federal regulators and big corporations to make our job of inspiring innovation, fostering entrepreneurship, giving our young access to the best 21st century tools, and bettering our economies much more difficult.
I call on the Texas Municipal League, the National League of Cities, and the US Conference of Mayors to explore these issues and add them to their legislative agendas. I also call on fellow city leaders to take the lead on this issue. Immediately, let’s address these two issues:
1) Call for a FCC rule prohibiting states from banning municipal broadband. Cities in states with such bans should begin actively lobbying their state legislature to reverse such rules. It is a counterproductive to our economic development goals. We need to begin thinking about broadband as a utility.
2) Pass city resolutions against the proposed FCC rules during this period of public comment. TML, NLC, and USCM can lead the way in creating sample resolutions and encouraging their member cities to adopt them.
City leaders must have a long-term perspective on this issue. The consequences for our citizens, families, educational institutions, and businesses are real and they are looming. It took leadership in the early 20th century to devise a regulatory program aimed at ensuring that every home and business had access to reliable electricity. Likewise, we are in need of leadership here in the dawn of the 21st century to get us the tools we need to lead the world in this innovation economy.
4 Comments
The FCC is also taking public comments during this period, and will revisit these proposed rules in a few weeks with public feedback in mind. We have an opportunity for positive, direct impact. And here’s how:
1. Go to http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/hotdocket/list and look for docket number 14-28 (“Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet”) and click on 14-28.
2. Enter your name, address, and your comments. Hit the submit button and confirm your comment on the next page. That’s it!
For example, you can write something as short as “the FCC should protect net neutrality by reclassifying broadband providers as common carriers under Title II.” Or, use parts of this blog post.
It’ll only take a couple of minutes of your day, and it could have a real impact on how these new rules shape up in their final versions.
Great post that deserves awareness. If providers are given the opportunity to capitalize on what people are able to interact with by changing the experience for a user, we will no longer be looking at a sustainable model for equal opportunity business or even balanced cultural impact. It’s not just small businesses or big business in America, even the artists will be at risk and the one thing (the internet) that acts as a semi-equal playing field will be disrupted. This is culturally significant as it could take the last piece of independence we have as equal citizens and promulgate the agendas of those who can already afford to be heard. Attacking net neutrality is attacking one of the last true elements of democracy we have in these United States. It is anti-American because it breeds exclusivity and opens the door to even more shady dealings and rigged mechanisms. There are plenty of cynics out there that believe that is actually a demonstration of our country as it has repeatedly committed actions that align with those low moral processes. However, I think that the original intent of our perpetually ravaged constitution would speak out against this, and the founding fathers, were they here, would probably throw out some pretty harsh tweets on the subject. This is a subject that cannot be taken lightly as it will have lasting repercussions as we continue to advance in technology and communications– something we should be proud of and not hinder by creating an unequal digital world whilst we proclaim an equal non-digital world, especially in a day and age when the digital world is being blended so thoroughly with our day to day lives.
Count me in for municipal broadband. How do we go about changing state law? Give me a number to call, meetings to attend, a ballot measure to vote on and I’m there.
As long as we are talking about public comments to the FCC and municipal broadband, I should mention that FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler recently threatened to supersede state laws banning municipalities from offering broadband. I think we might have more success petitioning the FCC do to this than aiming for Title II regulation. So, I suggest following Andy’s instructions but also saying something like “The FCC should supersede state laws banning municipalities from offering telecommunications services. Such laws inhibit the development of broadband connections and faster speeds in areas that want it.”