Vermont Towns Stand Up for the Common Good; Defy Monopolistic Telecoms
The Senate ignored the majority of American voters and the House of Representatives seems poised to also cave to Bush and follow the Senate's lead in granting telecoms retroactive immunity though even a communications trade group opposes it. So much for the elected denizens of Capitol Hill upholding the Constitution and serving their constituents, modest and moderate income Americans.
However, twenty-two Vermont towns have stood up for the constitutional common good against the greedy, undemocratic telecoms. They voted to join the East Vermont Community Fiber Network to create a public broadband infrastructure network.
A press release from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR) states: " 'These towns have made the right decision,” said Christopher Mitchell, Director of the Telecommunications as Commons Initiative at ILSR. 'Small towns across the United States have suffered from under-investment in telecommunications and these communities realized they can solve their broadband problems with smart public investments.'
"The proposed Vermont network will be state-of-the-art, offering residents faster broadband speeds than experienced from cable or DSL– which are generally unavailable to them currently.
“ 'Vermont Businesses and citizens alike are starved for modern connectivity to conduct transactions and participate in modern media,' noted Mitchell. 'Not only will many of these communities finally have access to broadband, the network will wholesale network access to other providers, offering subscribers true choices and competition.' ”
They are joining the growing numbers of communities throughout the US screwed by corporate monopolies, especially in utilities, who deliberately provide inadequate, high priced service and in some cases, no service to the public in order to increase company profit.
As reported in the New Standard in 2005, "The government of Philadelphia announced yesterday an ambitious business plan for a citywide high-speed wireless Internet service. The municipal network, designed to span 135 square miles, is a landmark in a growing movement toward publicly supported, high-speed open networks. But as activists herald the network as a step forward in defiance of telecommunications monopolies, they remain vigilant about the national struggle of community Internet initiatives against corporate lobbying and media campaigns.
"The initiative for Philadelphia's network emerged from community concerns over unmet technological needs."
But the monopolistic telecoms, who weren't providing for public needs at a reasonable price fought this public initiative with lobbying and big bucks and succeeded in 'persuading' elected officials like Democratic Governor Ed Rendell to bow to their corporate demands.
"...the nascent plans for the Philadelphia network were nearly aborted when Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, backed by telecommunications behemoth Verizon, signed a law that would bar every local government from providing broadband 'within the service territory of a local exchange telecommunications company,' unless that body first offered the incumbent service provider an opportunity to deploy its own network. So now legacy service providers automatically take priority over municipalities in setting up citywide networks."
And those giant telecoms have been busy throughout the United States trying to stop public broadband networks.
As the article continues, "Fourteen states have passed laws restricting public entities from competing with private companies in providing telecommunications services, according to the American Public Power Association, a public utilities association that supports municipal broadband initiatives.
"According to the most recent report of the Baller-Herbst Law Group, which specializes in municipal networking issues, anti-municipal broadband bills are now under consideration in eight states, including Texas, Iowa and Colorado."
These greedy giant vultures complain and whine with crocodile tears.
"Corporations claim they are lobbying to prevent government monopolies, not to bolster their own. When questioned about the industry's lobbying activities at a March 15 US Senate hearing on telecommunications mergers, Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg argued, "[W]e find it unfair that municipalities that regulate us, set our taxes, set our franchise fees? also now want to compete with us, under a different set of rules.' " according to the New Standard.
Boo, hoo. Corporations have had a monopolistic stranglehold on the public throat in the misnamed "free market" of so called "public" utilities while failing to provide dependable, quality service to all the public and charging unnecessary high prices. Profit not public service is their bottom line.
As the New Standard states, "But activists believe that the success of wireless networks operating outside the mainstream telecommunications regime reveal the failure of big business to serve people?s needs. Vos commented, '[T]he telcos have only themselves to blame for ignoring entire communities" and setting artificially high prices.' "
However, twenty-two Vermont towns have stood up for the constitutional common good against the greedy, undemocratic telecoms. They voted to join the East Vermont Community Fiber Network to create a public broadband infrastructure network.
A press release from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR) states: " 'These towns have made the right decision,” said Christopher Mitchell, Director of the Telecommunications as Commons Initiative at ILSR. 'Small towns across the United States have suffered from under-investment in telecommunications and these communities realized they can solve their broadband problems with smart public investments.'
"The proposed Vermont network will be state-of-the-art, offering residents faster broadband speeds than experienced from cable or DSL– which are generally unavailable to them currently.
“ 'Vermont Businesses and citizens alike are starved for modern connectivity to conduct transactions and participate in modern media,' noted Mitchell. 'Not only will many of these communities finally have access to broadband, the network will wholesale network access to other providers, offering subscribers true choices and competition.' ”
They are joining the growing numbers of communities throughout the US screwed by corporate monopolies, especially in utilities, who deliberately provide inadequate, high priced service and in some cases, no service to the public in order to increase company profit.
As reported in the New Standard in 2005, "The government of Philadelphia announced yesterday an ambitious business plan for a citywide high-speed wireless Internet service. The municipal network, designed to span 135 square miles, is a landmark in a growing movement toward publicly supported, high-speed open networks. But as activists herald the network as a step forward in defiance of telecommunications monopolies, they remain vigilant about the national struggle of community Internet initiatives against corporate lobbying and media campaigns.
"The basic monthly access fee for high-speed access through the public network would be less than $20, or about the standard price of a dial-up account. Different levels of service would be offered for public institutions and businesses, and discounted rates would be available to economically disadvantaged groups. A regular residential high-speed Internet connection currently costs as much as $50 per month for a single household. The city will also provide mobile wireless or "nomadic" services for free in public parks, while the major cellular service provider T-Mobile currently charges $40 per month for mobile Internet subscriptions, which can be accessed from specific commercial locations such as Starbucks coffee shops.
"The initiative for Philadelphia's network emerged from community concerns over unmet technological needs."
But the monopolistic telecoms, who weren't providing for public needs at a reasonable price fought this public initiative with lobbying and big bucks and succeeded in 'persuading' elected officials like Democratic Governor Ed Rendell to bow to their corporate demands.
"...the nascent plans for the Philadelphia network were nearly aborted when Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, backed by telecommunications behemoth Verizon, signed a law that would bar every local government from providing broadband 'within the service territory of a local exchange telecommunications company,' unless that body first offered the incumbent service provider an opportunity to deploy its own network. So now legacy service providers automatically take priority over municipalities in setting up citywide networks."
And those giant telecoms have been busy throughout the United States trying to stop public broadband networks.
As the article continues, "Fourteen states have passed laws restricting public entities from competing with private companies in providing telecommunications services, according to the American Public Power Association, a public utilities association that supports municipal broadband initiatives.
"According to the most recent report of the Baller-Herbst Law Group, which specializes in municipal networking issues, anti-municipal broadband bills are now under consideration in eight states, including Texas, Iowa and Colorado."
These greedy giant vultures complain and whine with crocodile tears.
"Corporations claim they are lobbying to prevent government monopolies, not to bolster their own. When questioned about the industry's lobbying activities at a March 15 US Senate hearing on telecommunications mergers, Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg argued, "[W]e find it unfair that municipalities that regulate us, set our taxes, set our franchise fees? also now want to compete with us, under a different set of rules.' " according to the New Standard.
Boo, hoo. Corporations have had a monopolistic stranglehold on the public throat in the misnamed "free market" of so called "public" utilities while failing to provide dependable, quality service to all the public and charging unnecessary high prices. Profit not public service is their bottom line.
As the New Standard states, "But activists believe that the success of wireless networks operating outside the mainstream telecommunications regime reveal the failure of big business to serve people?s needs. Vos commented, '[T]he telcos have only themselves to blame for ignoring entire communities" and setting artificially high prices.' "
Last November 30, I wrote " 'Can You Hear Me Now?' Who Is To Blame For US Cell Phone And Internet Failures,"
"This is the 21st century but sometimes, sitting at the computer, you wouldn't know it. Even though many Americans have supposedly high speed broadband connection, there are times when the term 'high speed' is a misnomer. Compared to Europe and Japan, it's laughable and horribly slow. In many parts of the United States, it's not even available, still dial-up, especially in rural areas.
"Contrary to popular opinion, the United States doesn't lead in this field, just as its unequal, unfair, and unaffordable health care coverage is terrible compared to other industrialized nations.
"At one time, not too long ago, the US led in the Internet world, but fell behind. Why? Unlike Europe, Japan and other countries, greedy corporate interests, invoking the mantra of the free market, 'persuaded' government officials, who didn't need much persuading, to keep hands off....no effective regulation.
"So when the Internet connection for which you pay good bucks is sluggish, and your cell phone won't work because you're in a "dead zone", i.e. another cell phone competitor's territory, remember it's because AT&T, Verizon and their ilk put avarice, huge profits, CEO millions first, with the help of Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill and Bushite government officials and their belief (wink, wink) in the myth of the free market. American consumers are definitely, always last."
Hats off to those twenty-two "we the people" Vermont communities!
"This is the 21st century but sometimes, sitting at the computer, you wouldn't know it. Even though many Americans have supposedly high speed broadband connection, there are times when the term 'high speed' is a misnomer. Compared to Europe and Japan, it's laughable and horribly slow. In many parts of the United States, it's not even available, still dial-up, especially in rural areas.
"Contrary to popular opinion, the United States doesn't lead in this field, just as its unequal, unfair, and unaffordable health care coverage is terrible compared to other industrialized nations.
"At one time, not too long ago, the US led in the Internet world, but fell behind. Why? Unlike Europe, Japan and other countries, greedy corporate interests, invoking the mantra of the free market, 'persuaded' government officials, who didn't need much persuading, to keep hands off....no effective regulation.
"So when the Internet connection for which you pay good bucks is sluggish, and your cell phone won't work because you're in a "dead zone", i.e. another cell phone competitor's territory, remember it's because AT&T, Verizon and their ilk put avarice, huge profits, CEO millions first, with the help of Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill and Bushite government officials and their belief (wink, wink) in the myth of the free market. American consumers are definitely, always last."
Hats off to those twenty-two "we the people" Vermont communities!
Comments