Let cities compete for broadband: Our view Why should they be powerless as big companies route the information superhighway around them?

The Editorial Board | USA Today

Over the years, local governments have gotten into a variety of businesses. Some have their own electric utilities or hospitals. And some have become real estate developers in the name of urban renewal. Often, they started their businesses because the private options were either unattractive or non-existent.

While such municipal enterprises are rarely models of efficiency and ingenuity, few people would argue that localities have no right to be in them.

But things are very different with broadband Internet service. Major providers have successfully lobbied 19 states to pass laws that ban or limit local government entry. And now the private ISPs are fighting a rule, set for Federal Communications Commission consideration next week, that would pre-empt these laws.

The FCC should stand up to the broadband lobby and approve the rule. The laws in question have not been passed in the name of limited government but rather in the name of limiting competition.

Yes, some of the existing municipal systems have been abject failures. A group of cities in Utah, for instance, put its system up for sale after years of losses. But some have been successes. Google built a $1.2 billion data center in The Dalles, Ore., after the city built a network.

Most are the subject of considerable debate, none more so than the system built by Lafayette, La., over stiff opposition from AT&T, Cox Communications and others. Supporters argue that Lafayette created a high-quality system in an area ignored by private companies. Critics point to its inability to make a profit.

The question, however, is not whether these systems are good, but whether they should be quashed by acts of legislatures. The answer is no.

Communities build broadband systems as strategic investments much as they might build (or subsidize) a retail-office-housing complex in an effort to turn around a struggling downtown. They don't particularly want to be in the business, but they have a problem to address.

These communities look at broadband a bit like towns in the 19th century looked at railroads: either be on the network or be consigned to a future of decline.

Their local adventures in broadband in some cases might be ill-considered. But it is difficult to see why they should be rendered powerless as big companies route the information superhighway around them.

It is also hard to see why the big companies deserve to have potential competitors eliminated. In some cases, the possibility that a local government could get into the business is all there is to keep them on their toes.

The FCC's proposed rule does raise some legal and constitutional questions, most notably whether a 1996 law gives the commission the authority to pre-empt states and, if so, whether that law is constitutional.

If the rule is struck down, then so be it. Cities will then have to defeat the lobbyists one state at a time. Either path would help build out broadband Internet and promote competition.

That is worth doing, even if some of the systems are less than rousing successes.

USA TODAY's editorial opinions are decided by its Editorial Board, separate from the news staff. Most editorials are coupled with an opposing view — a unique USA TODAY feature.

To read more editorials, go to the Opinion front page or sign up for the daily Opinion e-mail newsletter.