Michigan Introduces New, Awful Bill to Ban Community Broadband Michigan is the latest state to try and pass a law supported by (and likely written by) incumbent ISPs that tries to prevent communities from building their own broadband networks. Towns and cities for years have been forced to consider building their own broadband networks, thanks to a lack of competition in the broadband sector. This lack of competition usually results in regional duopolies doing the bare minimum to improve service in these markets, forcing towns and cities to get creative if they actually want to receive faster speeds at more reasonable prices.

If large ISPs really wanted to stop this from happening, they could improve service and lower rates. But more often than not, it's much easier to just pay state lawmakers to introduce awful, protectionist bills banning towns and cities from building their own networks, or in many instances even partnering with private companies like Google to improve local connectivity. Michigan Freshman Representative Michele Hoitenga is the latest to rubber stamp the whims of broadband duopolies, and has introduced HB 5099, a new bill that would make it difficult if not impossible for Michigan towns and cities to build or improve local broadband networks, even in instances where local ISPs refuse to. The bill proclaims that local communities cannot use federal, state, or even their own voter-approved funds to invest in even the slowest Internet infrastructure. And while it doesn't ban public/private partnerships outright, it does its best to discourage them, notes the folks at Institute for Local Self-Reliance, which has been fighting such ISP-written protectionist drivel for years. "(An) exception allows local communities to engage in public-private partnerships, but the bill’s ambiguous language is likely to discourage local communities from pursuing such partnerships," the group notes. "Rather than put themselves at risk of running afoul of the law, prudent community leaders would probably choose to avoid pursuing any publicly owned infrastructure initiatives." The bill is expected to hamper existing municipal broadband projects in the state in places like Sebewaing, Holland and Lyndon Township. In Lyndon Township, locals frustrated with sub-standard broadband recently voted overwhelmingly to approve funding and construction of a fiber network that will obliterate the slow, expensive service currently only partially available in the region. These bills help large ISPs disregard the will of the public, something that often annoys Republicans and Democrats alike (most municipal broadband networks are built in Conservative areas). Again, the large ISPs backing this latest bill (AT&T, CenturyLink and Charter) could stop towns from pursuing this kind of effort by actually offering better products and more reasonable prices. But given how corrupt most state legislatures are, it's far easier to write a bill, hand it to a rubber stamp politician alongside campaign contributions, then continue disregarding the backlash to existing pricey and substandard broadband services.







News Jump Comcast Shuts Off Internet for Subs Who Were Sold Service Illegally; AT&T, Verizon Team To Stop T-Mobile 5G; + more news California Defends Its Net Neutrality Law; AT&T's Traffic Up 20% Despite Data Traffic Actually Being Down; + more news Are The Comcast-Charter X1 Talks Dead In The Water?; AT&T May Offer Phone Plans With Ads For Discounts; + more news Europe's Top Court: Net Neutrality Rules Bar Zero Rating; ViacomCBS To Rebrand CBS All Access As Paramount+; + more news Verizon To Buy Reseller TracFone For $7B; 5G Not The Competitive Threat To Cable Many Thought It Would Be; + more news MS.Wants Records From AT&T On $300M Project; Google Fiber Outages In Austin, Houston, Other Texan Cities; + more news States With The Biggest Decreases In Speed; AT&T Hopes You'll Forget Its Fight Against Accurate Maps; + more news AT&T's CEO Has A Familiar $olution To US Broadband Woes; EarthLink Files Suit Against Charter; + more news 5G Doesn't Live Up To Hype, AT&T's 5G Slower Than Its 4G; Cord-Cutting Now In 37% of Broadband Households; + more news FCC Cited False Broadband Data Despite Warnings; ZTE, Huawei Replacement Cost Is $1.87B, But Only $1B Allocated; + more ---------------------- this week last week most discussed

Most recommended from 124 comments

Tch81

join:2015-08-10 34 recommendations Tch81 Member No surprises And...it's a Republican pushing another pro corporate bill. b10010011

Whats a Posting tag?

join:2004-09-07

Bellingham, WA 27 recommendations b10010011 Member most municipal broadband networks are built in Conservative areas...



Wait for it...



Freedom! And most Conservatives will continue to vote against their own best interest because...Wait for it...Freedom! Nucleartx

join:2016-09-08

Belton, TX 14 recommendations Nucleartx Member Federal taxes Imagine where our infrastructure would be if the corporations just didn't pocket all those federal subsidies? Brim77

join:2012-03-16

Lansing, MI 13 recommendations Brim77 Member I?m embarrassed to be a Michigander. Must be a slow day for the Republican clowns in office to find time to ban community broadband. I guess they ran out of rivers to pollute and teacher pensions to rob. Cam_

join:2013-05-15 5 recommendations Cam_ Member This representative "serves" a mostly rural area



Her pages informs us that she represents Wexford and Mecosta counties, and part of Osceola County that includes Reed City and the townships of Burdell, Cedar, Hartwick, Le Roy, Lincoln, Richmond and Rose Lake. So if you live in one of those areas, you might want to give her office a call, or write a letter reminding her that she's supposed to be representing her constituents, nor rubber-stamping legislation handed to her by lobbyists.



Her district is mostly rural. The largest cities are Cadillac and Big Rapids, both of which have populations of around 10,000 people. It's a pretty safe bet that a fair percentage of the people in her district either can't obtain broadband service at all, or can only obtain it from a single provider (more than likely DSL, via copper lines that have been around for several decades).



The large phone and cable companies have always tried to screw the people of Michigan, and this will help insure that they have no incentive to keep rates affordable. This is the web page for the Michigan representative that is pushing this awful bill: » gophouse.org/representat ··· oitenga/ Her pages informs us that she represents Wexford and Mecosta counties, and part of Osceola County that includes Reed City and the townships of Burdell, Cedar, Hartwick, Le Roy, Lincoln, Richmond and Rose Lake. So if you live in one of those areas, you might want to give her office a call, or write a letter reminding her that she's supposed to be representing her constituents, nor rubber-stamping legislation handed to her by lobbyists.Her district is mostly rural. The largest cities are Cadillac and Big Rapids, both of which have populations of around 10,000 people. It's a pretty safe bet that a fair percentage of the people in her district either can't obtain broadband service at all, or can only obtain it from a single provider (more than likely DSL, via copper lines that have been around for several decades).The large phone and cable companies have always tried to screw the people of Michigan, and this will help insure that they have no incentive to keep rates affordable.

Anon16eeb

@att.net 5 recommendations Anon16eeb Anon Don't understand this I sent a note to my representative on this. I am an independent, but every person that introduces these bills are notably republican. Isn't in instilled in the values of Republican's to have less government restrictions and that issues should be local? Let the local people vote on these matters and get the politics out of it. Ostracus

join:2011-09-05

Henderson, KY 4 recommendations Ostracus Member Deep pockets. Wonder what would happen if someone deep pocketed built everything and simply turned it over? Kind of hard to stop a gift like that, or at best a loan. RH WS

join:2015-01-08 3 recommendations RH WS Member Typo in Michigan's HB 5099? said by "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:" : SEC. 13B. (1) EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION (2), A LOCAL UNIT SHALL NOT USE ANY FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL FUNDS OR LOANS TO PAY FOR THE COST OF PROVIDING QUALIFIED INTERNET SERVICE. (2) A LOCAL UNIT MAY ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH 1 OR MORE PRIVATE PARTIES TO PROVIDE QUALIFIED INTERNET SERVICE. (3) AS USED IN THIS SECTION, "QUALIFIED INTERNET SERVICE" MEANS HIGH-SPEED INTERNET SERVICE AT A SPEED OF AT LEAST 10 MBPS UPSTREAM AND 1 MBPS DOWNSTREAM. Do you s'pose the bill flipped the upstream and downstream rates? I'm thinking that should have read ""QUALIFIED INTERNET SERVICE" MEANS HIGH-SPEED INTERNET SERVICE AT A SPEED OF AT LEAST 10 MBPS DOWNSTREAM AND 1 MBPS UPSTREAM."



source: » Do you s'pose the bill flipped the upstream and downstream rates? I'm thinking thathave read ""QUALIFIED INTERNET SERVICE" MEANS HIGH-SPEED INTERNET SERVICE AT A SPEED OF AT LEAST 10 MBPSSTREAM AND 1 MBPSSTREAM."source: » www.legislature.mi.gov/d ··· 5099.pdf