Included in discussions about efforts to reform telecom at the federal level is debate about whether cities should be banned from offering Wi-Fi services. But frankly, the issue is too new to be included in any federal measure, especially one designed to frame the next generation of telecom access.
Cities like Philadelphia are selling Wi-Fi access in areas that they believe are underserved by commercial systems. Even if there was 100-percent broadband deployment in the city, politicians favoring the effort say those services would be too expensive for some of Philly’s citizens.
People are all across the board on this issue. The state of Pennsylvania passed a law that prevents any of its cities from offering such services, but grandfathered in the Philadelphia system. It’s legal for cities in Maine to get into the Wi-Fi business, but not in Nebraska and Florida if private businesses want to offer service.
The Johns are divided on the issue too. Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) both favor efforts to let cities offer Wi-Fi services. Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) wants bans on municipalities offering broadband services. So does Sen. Pete Sessions of Texas.
At the heart of the argument is the question of whether private entities are moving fast enough to offer broadband services, especially in poor areas.
Who knew broadband access was a right guaranteed to all citizens?
Efforts to legislate broadband access-whether to ban cities from offering service or allowing them to do so-are likely wasted endeavors. By the time laws either banning or mandating Wi-Fi service are passed, challenged and otherwise pushed and pulled through the legislative system, the market will have developed-and technologies will have advanced or even been dismissed in favor of better technologies.
No doubt Verizon Communications Inc. is better at offering broadband access in a competitive market than a city, simply because Verizon’s core competency is telecom, wireless and wired. Competition from new PCS carriers helped propel existing cellular players to upgrade their networks at a faster pace. But that competition took time, and it will take time in the broadband arena too.
Wireless telephony has never been regulated like its wired counterpart because it is not considered essential, like electricity or plain old voice telephone. I would argue that broadband access is not essential either. Dial-up access is slow and frustrating to be sure, but it can get the job done.
In the meantime, just give the broadband market some time to develop. And put aside those legislative efforts, which could slow the industry instead of aiding it.
