It's a fairly simple question, really.
My current internet service provider (ISP) is Comcast/Xfinity/whatever the hell else they are calling themselves these days.
My current utility company is Xcel Energy.
The idea behind net neutrality is to turn ISPs into a regulated monopoly. As a practical matter, Comcast is a regulated monopoly, since they are able to provide monopoly service within a local area. The regulation here comes, in large measure, from the local governments that oversee the franchise agreement that Comcast operates under -- essentially, a swath of the Ramsey County suburbs. I can't get Charter, or Time Warner, or some other company. I do have the option of getting my phone and internet from CenturyLink; perhaps some day, I will.
Xcel Energy is regulated by the State of Minnesota, as is CenterPoint Energy. I can't buy my energy from CenterPoint, because I live in an area that Xcel serves.
At bottom, net neutrality is turning ISPs into regulated monopolies, but at the federal level. If you want to address the performance of a regulated monopoly, you have to take it up with the level of government that oversees the regulated monopoly. Right now, I can buttonhole someone in New Brighton city government about Comcast. If Comcast was regulated at the national level, I'd have to go to my congresswoman, Betty McCollum. Who is more likely to take my call?
If you support net neutrality, you are supporting oversight at a higher level of government. I can see why Barack Obama and Al Franken would like that. Should you? Here's a compelling argument why you shouldn't.
4 comments:
Mr. D, I disagree with your premise. I serve on one of the local commissions that deals with Comcast and the fact is that we have very little regulatory authority over that company and its policies. We can only challenge pricing at the lowest level (your basic $10 service). All services above that price point, including Basic 1, Digital and HD tiers, i.e. the vast majority of subscribers, is outside of our authority. And even when we file a rate order Comcast fights it and you know where it ends up? The FCC. So even though we have purported local control at the franchise level the real power already lies with the feds.
Damned by the feds if you do. Damned by the feds if you don't.
Mr. D, I disagree with your premise. I serve on one of the local commissions that deals with Comcast and the fact is that we have very little regulatory authority over that company and its policies. We can only challenge pricing at the lowest level (your basic $10 service).
Yes, but the local commissions can and do give the franchise to another company. That's likely to happen in my area soon.
Cable television is only part of the question here, but that's another post.
Ah, that's true. CenturyLink has been very aggressive with their new fiber service although the latest word from them is that they want to focus first on the core Twin Cities before branching out to our suburbs. I'm very hopeful they will give Greatland Communications (the new Comcast spinoff in the TC) a run for their money.
Post a Comment