Tennessee Study Shows State Remains A Broadband Backwater Thanks To AT&T Lobbyists, Clueless Politicians, And Protectionist State Law
from the get-the-hell-out-of-the-way dept
We've talked at great lengths about how AT&T's gruesomely cozy relationship with many state legislatures has severely damaged broadband expansion and adoption across huge swaths of the country. That's particularly true in Tennessee, one of nineteen states where AT&T lobbyists have literally written protectionist state laws defending AT&T's monopoly from broadband competition. AT&T's goal has been to stop the rise of public/private partnerships, which have only emerged as a direct response to AT&T's apathy.AT&T lobbyists have been happily getting such laws passed for fifteen years with little attention by the media. That began to change with the rise of efforts like Google Fiber, which more clearly illustrated how public/private partnerships have become essential in bringing broadband competition to countless areas incumbent ISPs deem "not profitable enough" to care about. Last year, the FCC finally woke up from its own long slumber on the subject, stating it would be preempting measures in two such state laws (in North Carolina and Tennessee) that hindered municipal broadband efforts from expanding.
Tennessee's response? To sue the FCC -- claiming that state rights were being violated (letting AT&T write bad state law? Perfectly ok, though).
As that lawsuit is being hammered out in the courts, Tennessee state leaders have been forced to respond to an increasingly annoyed citizenry; one that's slowly woken up to AT&T's role in keeping Tennessee a broadband backwater. Part of this effort by Tennessee leaders has been to fund a new study taking a closer look at the state of broadband in Tennessee. And while some thought the study would be used to obfuscate state broadband problems, the full survey has been released and it doesn't pull any punches (pdf).
The study ranked Tennessee 40th in terms of overall broadband investment and availability, and found that 13% of households (or 834,545 Tennesseans) lack access to any high-speed broadband internet service whatsoever. The study found that the vast majority of Tennessee residents still get internet access through slower services like DSL, wireless or dial-up connections, either because that's all that's available, or because they couldn't afford faster options. The bright spot in the Tennessee report? The ultra-fast services being offered by the state-owned utility in Chattanooga (EPB):
"In States where there are no restrictions, administrative burdens or regulatory limitations for any entity to build telecommunications infrastructure and offer services, there is more competition and more broadband investment, especially in rural parts of the state. Municipalities and electric cooperatives who have a vested interest in the vitality of their local communities are investing in broadband infrastructure because it is a key driver to economic development."But this shouldn't really be new information for state leaders who prioritize AT&T campaign contributions over the welfare of countless Tennessee residents and smaller businesses. They've just chosen to ignore reports like this one, because they've convinced themselves that selling state laws to the highest bidder is ok -- because they're engaged in a noble fight against government intrusion into the private sector. AT&T, as you might expect, clung tightly to this narrative when asked about the study by the Chattanooga Times Free Press:
"...a spokesman for AT&T called the consultant's report "disappointing," because it appears to favor more government involvement in private business. "It largely ignores private sector investment and focuses heavily on proposals that grow government with little reference to the associated costs and risks to taxpayers," spokesman Joe Burgan said."In reality, AT&T and other incumbent broadband providers simply adore bloated, dysfunctional government -- just as long as it's doing what AT&T wants. It's when government starts to heed the will of the people that you'll usually find AT&T crying like a petulant child. Tennessee politicians, too, showed they're not making much progress in opening their minds to the reality that improved broadband may mean some layer of local government involvement when the private sector fails state residents:
"Norris, who said he remains wary about municipal broadband based on the failure of Networx in his district near Memphis, said he hopes the push for more broadband is not an excuse for bigger government. Sen. Mark Green, R-Clarksville, vice chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, also expressed concern about allowing government-owned utilities like EPB to compete with private firms such as AT&T or Comcast. "We want to look closely at this study, but in general, I am not for government and business competing in the marketplace," he said.Again, though: AT&T and Comcast aren't competing, and Senators like Green are letting large ISPs literally write laws ensuring they never have to. And these local governments aren't getting into the broadband business because it's fun or because they're villains trying to ruin your ideological good time -- they're doing it because they've been saddled with awful broadband thanks to regulatory capture perpetuated by the same folks complaining about dysfunctional government.
Dysfunctional government fighting municipal broadband under the pretense of caring about stopping dysfunctional government is, for lack of a more scientific term, a massive disingenuous circle jerk. One that perpetuates distraction from the real issues of the day by intentionally inciting partisan discord.
All told the study found that Tennessee could easily deliver speeds of 25 Mbps to every business and consumer in the state for somewhere between $819.5 million and $1.7 billion. And while that's not a small number, you can be absolutely guaranteed that significantly more than that has been spent by AT&T (and unfortunately taxpayers) over the last fifteen years to ensure real, vibrant broadband competition never materializes.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: broadband, competition, lobbyists, muni broadband, protectionism, tennessee
Companies: at&t
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Sick of it!!!
Clueless PoliticiansGet it out of your freaking heads, Politicians are by no means clueless!
Corrupt is the freaking word you are looking for!
DAG'NABBIT!!!!
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Sick of it!!!
Get it out of your freaking heads, Politicians are by no means clueless!
Corrupt is the freaking word you are looking for!
DAG'NABBIT!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sick of it!!!
They have no idea how to make things better for anyone but themselves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Sick of it!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sick of it!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sick of it!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"That's different because mone- I mean reasons."
Great, so what about the numerous times a private company failed to meet what they promised('Theoretically capable of being connected still counts'), and then either wiggled out of the requirements or had the politicians step in and erase the requirements to let them off the hook?
If you're going to say that having the government or simply other private companies step in is a bad thing because sometimes it doesn't work out perfect or even just fails, then you cannot honestly then ignore the times that the companies you're favoring have done the same or worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "That's different because mone- I mean reasons."
Failure is the way markets eliminate inefficiencies.
Preventing failures is a guarantee of fat and laziness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "That's different because mone- I mean reasons."
ftfy
AFAIK, in a capitalistic economy, failed businesses are allowed to fail - that's just the way it is - there is no such thing as "To Big To Fail". So, I suppose this means our economy is not based upon capitalism but rather it is based upon socialism - Oh Noes!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not sure how the laws in my state are regarding broadband build out, but overall US broadband is in terrible shape.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not reponted in the news
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1) Stay
2) Get new service
3) Get TV service (so I can get unlimited bandwidth, apparently)
4) Get a wireless plan
5) Just put it on hold for a month"
I mean, jesus. I know the employees are incentivized to try to talk you into staying but this actually took 20 minutes to get them to do, and that's even with me saying "no" every 20 seconds. And now I have to send the box back or they will charge me $150 for what (at best) is a three year old, $15 router.
I had max UVerse speeds and a phone line, both were costing me twice as much as anywhere else, and AT&T just added bandwidth caps. To my already overpriced, shitty service.
I know Comcast etc. and any big company are likely the same but this is a case where there should be some sort of laws designed to make it easy for people to cancel service. They certainly do everything possible to keep you from cancelling. If only they cared as much about the middle part, the time between when I get the service and when I cancel.
I've been trying not to sign up to any service where you can't cancel as easily as you can sign up., but in cases like this where they have such a monopoly they can force you to get a credit check before they'll give you service, it seems unlikely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Which describes our major ISP perfectly!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]