SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the do-not-pass-go,-do-not-collect-$200 dept.
Big Telecom Convinces Missouri Lawmakers To Block Funding For Broadband Competition:
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) set aside $42.5 billion to be spent by the states on expanding access to affordable broadband. But state by state, telecom lobbyists are working hard to ensure that this money only goes toward "unserved" locations, and can't be used to potentially create competition in markets they already serve.
Last month we noted how states like Illinois, at the direct demand of companies like AT&T, have been passing restrictions on who can or can't access these funds. That includes blocking some cooperatives or local governments from building broadband networks. Since that's expressly forbidden by the IIJA, these states are risking all broadband funding
In other instances it's a bit more subtle than that. Missouri, for example, just passed a bill (once again directly demanded by AT&T) stating that "no federal funds received by the state, political subdivision, city, town, or village shall be expended for the construction of retail broadband internet infrastructure unless the project to be constructed is located in an unserved area or underserved area."
On its face it doesn't seem controversial. But if you know how the U.S. telecom sector and policy actually works, its intention becomes more clear. The bill doesn't just block funding for areas that are already served, it blocks access to projects in areas incumbent ISPs claim they might serve someday:
the current version of the bill would allow incumbent ISPs to block federal funding to competitors if they vaguely indicate they have eventual interest in upgrading an area. Historically, state and federal regulators in fealty to regional monopolies aren't consistent about following up on fiber deployment promises, potentially perpetuating longstanding Internet access coverage gaps.
(Score: 2) by HammeredGlass on Sunday May 01 2022, @10:12PM (2 children)
The graft of govt. programs will undercut competitors with taxpayer monies and oversupport efforts to bribe voters. e.g. student loans backed solely by govt. as the banks got out ~ten years ago.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 01 2022, @11:30PM (1 child)
The student loan program served quite admirably. It jacked up tuitions sky high, out of reach without a loan, pretty neat, huh?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday May 02 2022, @11:00AM
That is not entirely true. My son worked his way through college, without taking on exorbitant student loans. Most of the bad things said about student loans are true, but a determined miserly individual can get a college education without going into debt for life.
The student loan situation exists because of bad decisions, on student's part, on parent's part, on college counselor's part, on college administration's part, on banking's part, and on politician's part. A lot of people making bad decisions does not exactly put college 'out of reach' for the non-wealthy.
Start with the fact that you don't absolutely need a degree from an east coast Ivy League college to be successful. State colleges have always been much more affordable than places like Yale and Harvard. And, many of the state colleges are highly respected, even today with all the woke nonsense infecting colleges.