When elephants fight it’s the grass that suffers
August 9, 2006I don’t remember where I heard that phrase, but I was reminded of it when reading this story about the squabble between the cable and telephone companies in Pennsylvania. A bill was proposed in the state government to further open cable competition. Verizon, and the other phone companies, are in favor of that because they want to be that competition. Comcast, and the other cable companies, of course are against the bill.
I’m always in favor of more competition, though, in this case I find it hard to route for the same side as Verizon and the telcos. They are no better – often times, worse – than the cable companies. I’m so tired of big companies like the cable and telephone companies having monopolies on area services, allowing them to get away with charging whatever they want and not caring about customer service.
[...] Looks like it’s not just Pennsylvania, as New Jersey is also pushing through a bill that would open up cable competition to likes of Verizon. [...]
There is a sobering reality present in Pennsylvania today, which incumbent Joe Preston and the people who blindly support him may have yet to fully comprehend – there is so much more to politics than what State Representative Joe Preston has offered District 24.
Possibly nothing more than just election year theatrics, at one point Mr. Preston’s Consumer Affairs Committee had the majority of us believing landmark legislation (HB 2880) calling for cable choice and competition was poised to advance to the floor of the House for a vote.
Interestingly, just two years ago he surprised his constituents by quickly advancing from the committee, without a single public hearing, Act 201 (legislation that made it much easier for the seediest financial interest in the country to terminate the electric, gas, and water service of poor and low-income customers).
Nonetheless, on this occasion public hearings were held statewide to gather input and make things appear legitimate. And, together with Raymond Bunt, Jr. (R-147th District) and more than 80 additional cosponsors, the nearly flawless legislation (only lacked language to outlaw corporate redlining) was presented as an answer to the antiquated franchise system put in place decades ago. The redundant town-by-town franchises processes currently in place dramatically delays’ consumer choice and, in fact, increase the cost of doing business, i.e., constituents not cable companies actually foot the franchises revenues.
Cable companies with long-standing franchises (Comcast) argued against the legislation, and opposition centered on a big lie: “municipalities won’t get their franchise fees.”
Telecommunications firms (Verizon) and consumer agencies argued the proposed streamlined franchising process would better benefit customers by ushering in a myriad of TV choices and lower prices.
And, although an apparent majority of the public, education, and government access channels, and pertinent union membership groups testified that they approved the proposed legislation, last week Joe Preston pulled the bill from consideration.
Since 1995 cable rates have increased more than 86 percent.
Since 2001 cable prices have increased four times faster than the rate of the consumer price index.
Joe Preston must go!
http://koger.7p.com