A new article in the Heartland Institute’s IT&T News makes the case against municipal broadband service and posits a reasonable rebuttable to the contention that high-speed service is an essential service, just as electricity and water is.
Unlike water or electricity, high-speed service providers cannot count on a 100% take-rate, Steve Titch, the article’s author notes.
If broadband were really a consumer necessity the way electricity is, we would see virtually 100 percent penetration in the areas where broadband is available, just as we do for electricity. Municipal broadband proponents say we don’t see that level of penetration because of high prices. That assumption is questionable, though: Many households are willing to pay $100 a month or more for electricity, while broadband tops out at about $50 a month (and on average runs closer to $30 or $40).
Cynthia Brumfield at 10:00 AM|Comments(1)
Suggesting that municipal broadband networks are not legitimate candidates for public utilities because present broadband penetration rates are less than 100% is meaningless prattle. Going further and using this "straw house" argument to claim that municipal government should therefore be banned by state governments from making coherent economic investments in Internet broadband infrastructure does a disservice to the public. It's like saying that at the beginning of the 20th Century, because everyone did not own an automobile, we should pass laws that prevent the public from building motor vehicle roads.
It is better to start the discussion about municipal broadband by asking questions about the outcomes we want to achieve, both for communities, and for the nation as a whole. Do we want better, faster, cheaper government? Do we want to bring innovative solutions to the enormous social and economic problems we face in education, healthcare, transportation, energy consumption and pollution? Do we want to increase the flexibility and mobility of the American economy? Do we want to massively substitute the use of decreasing cost computer and fiber technologies for increasing cost industrial technologies? Do we want to spur innovation and enhance the competitiveness of America in the emerging global knowledge economy of the 21st Century? Do we want to create a digital economy where all private entrepreneurs are free to generate wealth unencumbered by telephone and cable television access rules? The answer to each question is a resounding yes! Therefore, we need to seriously re-think Internet broadband, and the role municipal government can play in ensuring we achieve these outcomes.
DSL, cable modems, wireless, and satellite broadband services supplied by private companies searching for the highest profit will not lead us to our desired goals. What we actually need is an Internet connection medium that fully complements the motor vehicle road network. One that provides open access to all entrepreneurs -- public and private; gives free access to business and residential consumers; produces commodity bandwidth at the lowest possible cost; is ubiquitous; and delivers at least one billion bits per second upstream and downstream to every site served by the motor vehicle road network. If we really want to benefit the public interest, instead of building "straw house" arguments that cloud the issue and benefit a few private companies, we should be arguing over the best way to make these desired outcomes happen.
Posted by: Mike Bookey at May 26, 2005 5:15 PM
Blogs We Read
