Franchise Freedom
FRANCHISE REFORM
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff]
[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission deserves full marks for its ruling last month that will make it easier for phone companies to enter the cable television business. The usual suspects are crying foul, but this is a decision that really will help millions of consumers who are currently paying cable rates dictated by anticompetitive video franchise agreements. The FCC's action is an attempt to streamline this process and eliminate the shake-downs that municipalities have been using to circumvent the 5% franchise fee cap. Under the new rules, states and local authorities must complete negotiations within 90 days. They also won't be allowed to impose "unreasonable" build-out requirements, such as demanding that phone companies offer their services everywhere that cable firms do within months of being granted a franchise agreement. We'd just as soon see such requirements scrapped altogether -- after all, the Bells are entering a competitive market with no guarantee of success -- but this is a step in the right direction. In the wake of the FCC's party-line 3-2 ruling, in which the agency's two Democrats dissented, the cable lobby is complaining that phone companies are receiving preferential treatment. Democratic Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein told reporters that the decision "undermines" local authority, by which he means poaching by thousands of local politicians. In fact, it's the local franchising authorities who have been undermining competition by protecting incumbents. And the cable industry's complaints are unpersuasive at best. Cable companies have marched right into the telephony market, making it more competitive, without facing the regulatory hurdles they want kept in place to prevent video competition from the Bells. Far from playing favorites, the new FCC rules aim to make the telecom playing field more level. They were long overdue.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116768346542164038.html?mod=todays_us_op...
(requires subscription)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116768346542164038.html?mod=todays_us_opinion