Slashdot Mirror


Kansas Delays Municipal Broadband Ban

Mokurai writes with an update to a story from last week about legislation in Kansas that would have banned most municipal broadband, including the expansion of Google Fiber. Now, after the public backlash that erupted online, government officials have postponed the legislation's hearings, putting it on hold indefinitely. From the article: "Senate Bill 304 would prohibit cities and counties from building public broadband networks. The Commerce Committee, which [Sen. Julia Lynn] chairs, was scheduled to have a hearing Tuesday, but Lynn released a statement that hearings have been postponed indefinitely. 'Based on the concerns I heard last week, I visited with industry representatives and they have agreed to spend some time gathering input before we move forward with a public hearing,' Lynn said in a statement. 'We'll revisit the topic when some of these initial concerns have been addressed.' Lynn elaborated while exiting a Senate Judiciary hearing. The senator said she has instructed 'the parties' involved with the bill to address the public’s concerns. The bill was introduced by John Federico, a cable industry lobbyist."

8 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. Translation by Art+Challenor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'We'll revisit the topic when some of these initial concerns have been addressed.'

    We're going to keep introducing this legislation until people stop watching and we can pass it (see also SOPA).

    1. Re:Translation by c0lo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Did they pass SOPA when I wasn't looking?

      They "distilled" it into TPP.
      In a sudden burst of common sense, seems that that (the/some/idnk-what-percentage) Dems are opposing Obama on this one.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:Translation by jxander · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think that the introduction of ANY competition would make the system cheaper and higher quality.

      The only thing preventing progress is collusion. Cox, Time Warner, Comcast, etc have agreed not to step on each others toes. Only 1 provider available in most markets means a functional monopoly.

      I think the government would be hard pressed to provide something WORSE than the current offerings. Seriously, they'd have to make a valiant effort to fuck it up that badly. And even a marginally better solution would cause a pretty large exodus from the current companies. Forcing them to improve their product (or lower their prices)

      --
      This signature is false.
  2. Re:We elect the greediest, most ill-informed... by tripleevenfall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No one votes on issues anymore. Everyone has been conditioned to vote based on identity politics.

    const "I am a (voting_block_01), therefore, I vote for (party_01)."

  3. Come on Common Carrier! by ArhcAngel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The sooner these bastards get labeled common carriers the better.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  4. Re evaluate munni broadband by symbolset · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is now time for all the states who put up barriers to or outright banned municipal broadband to look at the results and see if it serves the public interest. It does not. Everywhere these bills pass the incumbent cable companies immediately shut down investment because they no longer have to provide modern service.

    Washington state has such a law. Before it was enacted some municipalities were already started and so were grandfathered in. That is why you can have had gigabit fiber Internet to the home in Ephrata, WA (pop 8,000) for 14 years now, and Microsoft is building vast data centers out that way. It is also why you can't get gigabit fiber to your home in Seattle Metro area installed today, which enjoys a global peering point and is home to Microsoft, Amazon and a bunch of other big tech companies whose employees could really benefit from the service, and has 600 times the population density. This even though the cost of the equipment has come down by a factor of 100 in that 14 years.

    This is just wrong.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  5. Re:Good by wizkid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Say what you will about the big telcos that have buildings and pop's in the area. They won't provide broadband. Yes they're there and selling services to businesses. they won't touch broadband though. That would create competition. The only way to open up competition will be to encourage small business to come in and provide a better product. The telco's would rather spend money on lobbyists then put fiber in the ground.

    --
    I take no responsibility for what I say. Even though I'm never wrong :)
  6. Have the government lay literal pipes by tepples · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Then instead of having the government install "pipes" as in physical media for data communication, have the government install literal pipes. Because utilities' so-called natural monopolies ultimately result from government ownership of roads, city governments have power to take steps to grant utility access more efficiently, as I explained further in this comment. The city would bury conduit, and utility companies would pull their own copper, fiber, or whatever through the conduit. This would start in any neighborhood scheduled for water, sewer, or natural gas maintenance.