Save Access

Note: Tennessee faces another round of industry lobbying and propaganda.

from: The Tennessean

Franchise reform works in other states
Thursday, 10/25/07

By GREGG MORTON

I enjoy a good debate, and the Tennessee General Assembly has participated in a lively debate on the future of consumer access to advanced communication services in our state.

Specifically, the debate is about whether Tennessee is going to update its video franchise laws to encourage real competition in the local cable TV market to give consumers additional choices and control, as well as opportunities for cost savings.

Here are some important facts to help frame this debate:

• From 1995 to 2005, the Federal Communications Commission found that cable rates increased nationwide by 93 percent.

• Both the FCC and the U.S. Justice Department have said that the local-franchise process hinders competition and is a barrier to entry for competitors.

• Seventeen state legislatures have enacted video-franchise reform in the past two years, resulting in more consumer competition, access to new services, and private investment in new technology and advanced communication networks.

Consumers want competition

Public policy changes are often a result of a recognized public problem or need. Consumers in Tennessee recognize the need for video-franchise reform and are fed up with the current system that has limited competition and forced them to endure rising cable rates. Nearly three-quarters of Tennesseans polled earlier this year expressed their support for increased video competition.

Related to this, our governor and General Assembly recognized the importance of providing increased access to broadband services. Access to new technology and services is dependent on a regulatory environment that encourages private investment and competition.

Across the country, video-franchise reform has resulted in AT&T alone committing nearly $6 billion in new investment for network upgrades — including a total of $1.85 billion in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. Other states have taken action on video-franchise reform and are reaping the benefits for their citizens; why not Tennessee?

When companies like AT&T compete with cable, studies in specific markets demonstrated consumer rate cuts as high as 40 percent. In California, competition in the Bay Area drove Comcast to offer discounted bundled services to attract and keep customers. In Florida, as a result of competition from Verizon's FiOS video product, Bright House cable offered discounts to its bundled-service packages.

Competition in other communication services has encouraged providers to offer discounted bundles and pricing promotions for local, long-distance, Internet and wireless services. Unfortunately, cable TV customers in Tennessee are missing out because cable TV providers just don't face the same vigorous competition and have worked hard to delay its arrival. Their campaign of fear and misinformation has ensured that cable will keep their stranglehold on Tennessee consumers.

Competition works and is providing consumers more choices, better products and services, access to new technology and cost savings. Now is the time to give Tennessee consumers the benefits of a competitive video market.

Why not Tennessee?