Paul Soglin: Waxing America

Wisconsin Telephone Deregulation Bill Expected Soon; Still Bad For Rural and Elderly Landline Users

Here we go again: there's a draft telephone deregulation bill being negotiated by the industry's players that is based on the one that nearly passed last year. No bill number or sponsor yet - this time they will keep their fingerprints off until the steamroller is fully up to speed. Stripping the Public service Commission's powers to regulate the adequacy of landline phone service wasn't a good idea for rural and elderly consumers last year, and it's not a good idea now.

The PR and lobbying campaign laying the groundwork has already started with statements from the usual industry sock-puppets like "Wired Wisconsin."  Yesterday the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ran dueling op-ed pieces: they asked me to argue against Steve Bass of the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce. Bass, who made his rep as former Speaker Scott Jensen's mouthpiece, found Wired Wisconsin's wild assertions of the legislation's potential "to create or retain about 50,000 jobs in Wisconsin" quite convincing.

My response is here. A sample:

What's at stake? This year's bill probably will eliminate telephone providers' obligations to provide service to all areas of Wisconsin. The companies won't have to report profits and expenses to the PSC, which no longer would control rates or the adequacy of phone service and facilities. Market forces will be consumers' only protection; unhappy landline users would need to switch to a cable-based or cellular service.

But many rural areas of Wisconsin with spotty cellular service and no cable don't have affordable alternatives. And many older customers will not consider an unfamiliar technology; these landline users still need the PSC's legal protection.

Opposing last year's bill, Nino Amato, president of the Wisconsin Coalition of Aging Groups, said: "There are still 3 million customers in Wisconsin who use wired phone services, and we simply cannot abandon them."

...I suppose Grandma could just get a Blackberry and Wisconsin farmers could always do their business via the U.S. Postal Service.

With all the wholesale unregulating of industry going on at the Wisconsin Legislature, this one may well get very little attention and pass quietly.  Let's all keep our eyes open.

- Barry Orton

Protecting The Telecom Industry's Feathered Wisconsin Nest?

I'm always willing to push a metaphor to its limits. I hope my quotes in this week's Capital Times on the industry pushback to UW-Extension's rural broadband expansion federal BTOP grant made Todd Finkelmeyer's story a bit more accessible:

“This grant seems like a bizarre thing to fight, but if you look carefully at who is pushing this, it’s the same not-so-invisible hand of AT&T,” says UW-Madison professor and telecommunications expert Barry Orton. “This is an industry protecting its own nest. It’s the equivalent of the railroad industry 50 years ago saying, ‘You don’t need to put money into airports and please don’t put any federal funding into highways.’”

This pushback comes from the Wisconsin State Telecommunications Association (AT&T is WSTA's largest member CORRECTION - see comments), which never liked the concept of publicly-owned broadband and will use all its political clout to stop UW-Extension's plans.

Finkelmeyer:

In August, the University of Wisconsin-Extension — the branch of the UW System that extends the resources and research of the university across the state — announced it received two federal stimulus grants totaling $32.3 million to improve high-capacity Internet access.

One of those grants, worth $2.4 million, is to help UW-Extension support education and outreach by teaching underserved groups — such as farmers, senior citizens and the unemployed — about the advantages of using high-capacity broadband. This grant will also create 10 new public computer centers. No one contacted for this article was against using federal stimulus dollars for this undertaking.

The angst is over nearly $30 million that was awarded to build more than 600 miles of fiber optic cable that will bring high-capacity broadband connections to a range of key public entities and health care providers in the four communities, each of which has indicated a desire for more reliable broadband service and, not coincidentally, has a UW campus. This project’s budget is nearly $43 million when one adds in funds contributed from groups that will benefit from the infrastructure upgrade in each community.

Although (UW's David) Giroux acknowledges the project is unique for UW-Extension, he sees it fitting with the program’s mission: “Just as the UW was instrumental in helping dairy farmers pool their resources through locally owned cooperatives, we’re now working with Community Area Networks to help them build capacity, create local jobs, and improve their quality of life.”

The Racine JournalTimes noticed the industry whining and editorialized yesterday:

Businesses want to protect their business, but in the process of doing that, a group of Wisconsin telecommunications companies is busy stifling customer choice and stepping on innovation. There's nothing new about businesses trying to use the law to give themselves an advantage, but it's still wrong.

After calling for industry-government cooperation on this issue, the JournalTimes concluded:

Every time we flip a switch for electric power we are not drawing it from a government-run system or a fiercely competitive industry. We draw it from a regulated monopoly. Fighting over broadband turf will not accomplish anything other than to delay or derail the expansion of needed infrastructure. Just at the time when rural Wisconsin should be receiving help, this needless carping leaves it in the dark.

Indeed.

- Barry Orton

Tammy Baldwin To Receive Jane Lawton Award From NATOA

I'm really pleased about this: next month Rep. Tammy Baldwin will receive the Jane E Lawton Commemorative Award from the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA). NATOA presents the award annually to an elected official to recognize extraordinary service on behalf of local governments and communities throughout the United States.  It was created in memory of the Honorable Jane E. Lawton, who served as Mayor of Chevy Chase, MD; Delegate to the Maryland State House; and President of NATOA. 

NATOA selected Baldwin for her continued support for local government in communications, most notably the introduction of the Community Access Preservation Act (H.R. 3745). 

- Barry Orton

Why the Comcast-NBCU Merger Matters

Susan Crawford's blog has the reasons:

AT&T/TCI, 1999, SBC/Ameritech, 1999, Bell Atlantic/GTE, 1999, AT&T/MediaOne, 2000, AT&T/Comcast, 2002, Sprint/Nextel, 2005, SBC/AT&T, 2005, Adelphia, 2006, AT&T/BellSouth, 2007

And now, Comcast/NBCU.

Three thoughts prompted by that list.  First, there’s been enormous consolidation in the market for high-speed Internet access services.  All those mergers.  The most recent figures from the FCC, released in February of this year, show that when it comes to local access at or above 3 Mbps most Americans have a choice of at most two providers - a duopoly.

What’s really interesting, though, is the second thing the list should make you think about.  When it comes to access at higher than 6 Mbps speeds, cable is clearly in charge.  Over 96% of that market is cable’s - and the big players don’t compete with one another.  Those are the speeds you need to watch video.

And that’s why the relative size of the merger isn’t all that relevant.  What’s relevant is the market power that Comcast has in particular regions to provide what is rapidly becoming a single fast pipe to the home.  Over that pipe, the cable industry’s view is that Internet access can take up a few channels but that the rest of the pipe belongs to them.  And they have every interest in ensuring that alternative video marketplaces online don’t take off.

...No one has ever seen a lobbying campaign to equal this one.  That’s the third thought prompted by the picture:  those other guys were pikers compared to Comcast.

It looks like Comcast-NBCU is a done deal. Too bad.

- Barry Orton

Save Madison's City Channel!

Rookie Wisconsin State Journal columnist Chris Rickert hit a home run Wednesday with this column on the Madison City Channel. Facing a severe shortfall due to the phasing out of dedicated funding from cable television providers by the state's wrong-headed 2007 "cable competition bill,"  the City Channel could find its staff and resources severely diminished in next year's Madison budget. (Disclosure: for the last six months, I served on the Madison City Channel Ad Hoc Advisory Committee, which explored ways to address the shortfall, and recommended ways to mitigate its impacts.)

Rickert:

...paying attention to local government is kind of like voting. There's no valid argument for not doing it, but that doesn't mean people always do.

I have some confidence that Madisonians are a more civic-minded lot. Prove me right and show the City Channel some love: Tell your alderperson to fund it.

Coincidentally, Brenda Konkel posted a teaser yesterday on what she would do if she were mayor. She's not running (yet), but allowed how it was "likely only to happen if I just get mad enough to do it."  Of the 101 things she listed, number 67 was:

City Channel and WYOU would be supported at reasonable levels and explore a media center concept or other collaborations between Community, School and Government television stations.

This collaboration was a possibility that was outlined in the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee's report and makes good sense to pursue. The City Channel, WYOU and the MMSD's channel (MMSD-TV) perform valuable public services, and every possibility to help all three survive should be explored.

- Barry Orton

Verizon and Google Deal Not Good For Net Neutrality; FCC Needs To Act

Susan Crawford has the right take on the Verizon - Google "joint policy proposal:"

These two giants have found a policy vacuum and they have, understandably, filled it. A private deal - even a private deal aimed at suggesting legislation - is not the same thing as acting in the public interest.  That’s the FCC’s charge.

...What’s needed now is leadership.  Here’s a quote sent to me yesterday - from LBJ to regulators:  “Let the venal and the self-seeking and the tawdry and the tainted fear to enter your building.”  You need backbone to regulate a giant industry, and this one is too important to our economic, social, and cultural future to ignore.

Waxing America has been concerned about this for quite a while. Verizon and Google (and AT&T and Comcast and Time Warner) should not be making broadband policy; that's the FCC's job or, if the FCC fails at it, Congress' task.

- Barry Orton

Don Borchert: Pioneer Broadcast Engineer, Educator, and Antenna Visionary

When reporter Barry Adams of the Wisconsin State Journal and and photographer Mike DeVries of the Cap Times did a great piece on the Madison Community Tower last month, one thing was missing: mention of Don Borchert, longtime Wisconsin Public Broadcasting chief engineer, and the man who conceived and oversaw development of the 1,423-foot antenna cluster on the far west side. The Community Tower, which is owned and operated by the UW, is known in the industry as a "candelabra" and allows multiple users (4 TV stations, several radio stations and others) to share space on a single tower instead of each operating a separate large antenna tower.  The resulting visual pollution and land use impact reductions can never be measured, and the Madison community owes Don Borchert many thanks.

Don's other major contributions can be more easily enumerated: the thousands of fellow TV and radio engineers he helped educate with over twenty years of Broadcasters' Clinic, an annual conference/trade show he ran (I served as his UW faculty factotum) for Midwest members of the Society of Broadcast Engineers, and the growth of Wisconsin Public Broadcasting to the robust statewide system we enjoy today.

When I first worked with Don on Broadcasters' Clinic in 1980, he asked me if I had ever heard of an antenna candelabra.  Luckily, the previous year I had proposed building two of them to make TV news coverage of New Jersey easier for New York and Philadelphia stations, so I was able to pass Don's muster. Subsequently, he taught me a lot about how to run a conference, build a loyal cadre of professional colleagues, treat exhibitors, and manage people.

Don Borchert died on August 3rd, at 83. His obituary is here.  A celebration of his life will be held this afternoon at the Esquire Club at 4 pm.  May his memory be for a blessing to his family and friends.

- Barry Orton

Wisconsin SD-07: Chris Larson Challenges "Pay to Plale"

The Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce is bi-partisan.  WMC loves almost every Republican in the legislature plus Senator Jeff Plale (D-South Milwaukee).  Plale chairs the Senate Committee on Commerce, Utilities, Energy and Rail and some of his biggest campaign donors are executives from the cable television and energy industries, and from the WMC. Plale has pushed deregulation of nearly every industry his committee oversees, and Xoff calls it "Pay to Plale:"

Do the special interests pour money into Plale's campaign because he agrees with them and has already done things they want to reward? Or do they give so Plale will do nice things for them in the future?

Some people say the legislature works like a vending machine -- put your money and legislation comes out. But sometimes the machine jams and you lose your money, or you have to start over and put money in again.

Some people call it Pay to Play. But that's almost impossible to prove, that there is any quid pro quo involved.

But one thing's for sure. The State Senator from South Milwaukee has some unusual friends. And they're willing to play the game, whatever it is, to keep him in office.

Just call it Pay to Plale.

Milwaukee County Board Supervisor Chris Larson is challenging Plale in the 7th Senatorial District Democratic primary, and has attracted a lot of union and grassroots support so far. It's very difficult to oust a seated Senator in a primary in either party, but it looks like Larson has a decent chance.

- Barry Orton

Telecom Policy Astroturf Alert

A group of 17 minority-oriented organizations are coming out against moving FCC authority over broadband to a telecommunications/common carrier orientation (Title II) from a less robust information services designation (Title I). We explained the move in May, and its potential impacts on "Net Neutrality".

The Hill's story quotes a letter the groups wrote Congressional leaders seeking legislation over FCC action because:

...we are concerned that the Commission's proposed regulations could be a distraction from efforts to implement the National Broadband Plan.  By injecting uncertainty into the broadband market, we fear that proposed regulations could have detrimental effects on investment, innovation and job creation.

Sounds more like AT&T and Verizon's concerns than those of diversity groups. Unless, of course, the groups are astroturf mouthpieces that echo the positions of their major fund sources, like AT&T and Verizon. 

Closer to home, AT&T-funded Wired Wisconsin's Thad Nation manages to bemoan the fate of the 125 most recently laid-off AT&T workers and at the same time pitch AT&T-sponsored legislation for further deregulation of the phone industry. Nation entreats Wisconsin to follow the lead of Ohio and Illinois, where somehow "legislation passed within just the last few weeks" has already led to "...more than 80 new cellular towers ... due to be built in Illinois" and "roughly $120 million will be invested in upgrading the infrastructure of a wireless services center in Akron." 

Funny how these big capital investment decisions, which usually take many months to plan, happened to be announced just before or just after the Ohio and Illinois deregulation legislation passed, and even with the national "uncertainty" that the diversity group sock-puppets fear. 

- Barry Orton

FCC Triangulation on Net Neutrality and Broadband: "Forbearance," "Unforbearance," and the "Third Way"

Federal Communication Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski has engineered what he's calling a "Third Way" on the crucial issue of Net Neutrality and broadband development. Pressured by many into reclassifying high-speed Internet access as a "telecommunication service," (Title II) which would allow significantly greater government oversight, Genachowski showed sensitivity to the telecom industry (and right-wing lobby) pushback to leave the classification as a lightly-regulated "information service" (Title I).  Promising that the FCC would only regulate when and where necessary ("...a narrow and tailored approach"), Genachowski's FCC majority would take the step to reclassify high-speed Internet access as a "telecommunication service," but utilize "forbearance," a legal concept involving voluntarily refraining from enforcement, for much of the FCC's traditional powers under Title II, such as rate regulation and forced unbundling. Susan Crawford has a letter from the FCC's General Counsel Austin Schlick explaining all this and much more here.

This regulatory triangulation is not likely to satisfy the industry critics of Net Neutrality, nor stop the flow of lobbying funds to their sock-puppet mouthpieces. There will be court challenges galore, and efforts to game the FCC, Congress and state legislatures. The industry knows well that where there is forbearance by an independent regulatory agency, there can later be "unforbearance" when circumstances change.

One thing is certain: the "Third Way" will be a boon for the army of telecommunications lawyers, lobbyists, and policy consultants fighting for advantage on all sides of the many issues involving broadband. Thanks, Chairman Genachowski.

- Barry Orton