[Cialug] Iowa Municipal Telecom Legisation

Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:17:15 -0600

exactly!

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:14:03 -0600, Dave J. Hala Jr. <dave@58ghz.net> wrote=
:
>=20
> My complaint isn't about the "Evil Telco's" per say.  My complaint is
> that large companies have entirely too much influence in the legislative
> process. In this case it just happens to be Telco's. Ten years ago it
> was Lennox Industries.  You could really call it democracy by dollars.
>=20
> I understand that he who has the gold makes the rules, but it doesn't
> mean that I have to like it.  When the playing field is slighted by
> someone with a lot of gold, its bad for all of us.
>=20
> I'm really opposed to this type of legislation. Communities should be
> able to give it a shot if they choose. Why take the option off the
> plate?
>=20
>=20
> On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 14:45, Michael Osten wrote:
> > On Feb 22, 2005, at 10:50 AM, Dave J. Hala Jr. wrote:
> >
> > > Its another example of Republican Bush-O-nomics.  Its more legislatio=
n
> > > sold under the guise of "Improving the business Environment" Basicall=
y,
> > > its eliminating community players in potential Telco markets.
> > >
> > > I wouldn't be surprised if a new bill popped up saying that ISP's had
> > > to
> > > use MS servers, in order to protect us from Cyber Terrorism. Its a su=
ch
> > > load of crap.
> > >
> > > Internet infrastructure should be a public utility, if a community
> > > would
> > > choose to have it that way... Communities should not be hampered by
> > > this
> > > Kind of B.S.   They don't need feasibility studies, they have the
> > > community to answer to.
> > >
> > > It offends me to the point where I become almost insane enough to run
> > > for public office.
> >
> > As a disclaimer, I work for a telecom, which also happens to be the
> > largest ISP in the state of Iowa.  However, my opinions are not that of
> > my employer.
> >
> > It really isn't a case of the evil telecoms forcing over-priced
> > products on cities.
> >
> > What people fail to realize the telecom industry is one of the most
> > heavily regulated industries in the country.  Telecoms are forced to do
> > hugely unprofitable things for the benefit of public good.  Such as
> > running telephone lines into rural areas.  Sometimes running millions
> > of dollars of infrastructure to areas that serve a very small amount of
> > people.  Such a small amount that the cost would never be recuperated
> > simply because of the regulated prices that telecoms can charge.  We
> > currently have DSLAM's in areas that serve fewer than 10 people,
> > providing the only hope these people currently have for affordable
> > broadband.  The small towns that we serve have no hope of providing
> > service to their residents, it is simply to expensive and complex. This
> > is not profitable for us, but is the cost of doing business.   Telecos
> > are fighting these municipalities simply because they put local
> > municipalities on a unleveled, unregulated playing field with the
> > heavily regulated, "for profit" telecos.  This really also has nothing
> > to do with internet access per-se.  IMHO it has more to do with the
> > coming of VOIP products that are completely unregulated, and do not
> > require the infrastructure that the telecoms have been forced to put in
> > place.  Other "for-profit" entities we can compete against, but tax
> > payer fed, and deficit running municipalities used to hemorrhaging
> > money we can not.
> >
> > You also need to look at why cities would want to do this?  Is the
> > service they currently have so terrible and overpriced?  I doubt it.
> > Sure to people like us, fiber to the door would be nice, but do you
> > really think "Joe six-pack" really needs or wants to subsidize said
> > fiber, or wireless for that matter?
> >
> > Below is a quote from Alan Wells, the CEO of Iowa Telecom in the Des
> > Moines paper:
> >
> > Q. There is an effort to bring fiber to the home with OpportunityIowa.
> > What are your thoughts on that?
> > A. You have to take a step back and say what's the need we're trying to
> > address =E2=80=A6 Is telecom and capacity on the network holding us bac=
k from
> > economic development? I don't think so. If it was, I think we'd have
> > heard a lot more about communities coming to us or somebody else saying
> > we have a development need. How can you help us meet it? (Fiber to the
> > home) is an awful lot of money for cities and communities to take on
> > responsibility for without a demonstrated need.
> >
> > Q. Is that a statement in opposition to OpportunityIowa?
> > A. I wouldn't say opposition. Whoever makes the decision about the need
> > for fiber to the home really needs to understand the costs and risks
> > that go along with it and make sure those costs and risks are
> > warranted=E2=80=A6 . If a community decides it's being held back becaus=
e of
> > telecommunications, it really take a close look whether that's the case
> > before deciding to spend millions of dollars of city money to go build
> > something.
> >
> > I think that Mr Wells is right, the only sane reason to use tax payer
> > money for infrastructure is where private enterprise would be too cost
> > prohibitive (ie roads, power plants, etc).
> >
> > Here is also something to think about, if the communities take over a
> > utility, would in the world would you complain to if it wasn't up to
> > your standards?  We all know how well government handles our tax money.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Michael Osten
> > http://www.bleepyou.com/~mosten/pgp.txt
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cialug mailing list
> > Cialug@cialug.org
> > http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
> --
>=20
> Open Source Information Systems (OSIS)
> Dave J. Hala Jr. <dave@osis.us>
> 641.485.1606
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Cialug mailing list
> Cialug@cialug.org
> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>