Jun 22
UTOPIA…The Day That Would Never Come, Is Here.
2009 at 5:52 am | posted by Rep. Craig Frank 17 comments
Just remember as you link to this Deseret News Editorial about UTOPIA…this day was “never” supposed to come…and, now it’s standing at the door. Also, remember this D-News article isn’t mine…it’s theirs. And, remember when a governmentally guaranteed telecom system took sales-tax pledges only as a “back-up, just in case”…they really DID plan to use them…that’s why they took them.
June 22nd, 2009 at 10:27 am
As long as I can get fiber optic to my home, I’ll pay anything. COMCAST and Qwest refuse to provide it.
June 22nd, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Richard, I have no problem with YOU paying anything to get fiber optic to your home. I have a problem when everyone else has to pay to get fiber optic to your home.
June 22nd, 2009 at 5:54 pm
If there truly is enough demand for fiber to justify the cost, why wouldn’t a private company or a group of investors fund the project and then make a boatload of money collecting from all the subscribors?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
June 23rd, 2009 at 9:30 am
JJL9 apparently has zero understanding of the realities of the telecommunications market and the difficulties of overbuilding combined with blissful ignorance as to what Verizon is doing with FIOS.
And Rep. Frank, I would really like to see your source that anyone said that bonds would never, ever be called. Primary sources only.
June 23rd, 2009 at 8:17 pm
The sad fact is some people don’t care what UTOPIA costs society…just so long as it lives.
June 24th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
What with broadband being an increasingly important factor in the livelihood of million so Americans, it’s unfortunate some can’t see past their ideology enough to play a productive party in shaping efforts like UTOPIA, rather than, well… what you do, Craig.
June 25th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Free-Market OR Socialism…you decide.
June 25th, 2009 at 11:40 am
I think Rep. Frank just invoked a corollary to Godwin’s Law.
June 25th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
I love it when the best way to refute an opposing opinion is to state that the other person “obviously doesn’t understand” the issue.
That’s a great argument every time.
If it’s a good idea, convince everyone that it’s a good idea and have them voluntarily decide to do it. Government should have no roll in this process. Have them pull out their check book and help pay for it. Don’t continue with the argument that the “people” are too stupid for their own good and that only really smart government bureaucrats could possibly know what’s best for them.
June 25th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Jesse: Socialism is socialism. Are you afraid to call it what it is?
June 29th, 2009 at 11:03 am
JJL9: Well… you don’t. I could spend a few hours typing up background on telecommunications, pointing you to additional sources, etc., but I don’t think it would change any of your opinions. What’s the point of providing illumination when your response will be to cover your eyes? All I see from the anti-UTOPIA crowd is a lot of carping and no solutions. Most of you won’t even acknowledge the problem. Reminds me of the last of the Narnia books where most of the creatures can’t see Aslan, only darkness, by their own choice.
I call socialism when I see it. Like the glut of federally-mandated fees collected by incumbent telcos. Or the exclusive franchises granted to most cable companies. Or the decades of de facto and de jure monopoly protection afforded to incumbents by federal, state, and local governments. Or the byzantine regulations that prevent new providers from entering a market, most of which were created at the request of the companies they regulate. Are those all healthy signs of a free market? If we’re going to talk about the issues, let’s talk. If you just want to complain without offering up any solutions, please, for the good of the discussion, excuse yourself from it. (Rep. Frank, I’d give you the same advice.)
Where you and Rep. Frank go wrong is by thinking that screaming “SOCIALISM!!” at the top of your lungs somehow wins the debate. It’s sophomoric and intellectually vapid name-calling designed to pander to a small and yet somehow loud segment of society. That may win points at your local tea party, but it looks pretty empty to everyone else. I’m betting the two of you only say it because you’ve got nothing else. And that’s just sad.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
private industry can run a socialized system with government aid via mandated fee’s and legal protections just as well as government can run a socialized system.
What we have now is socialism. You have a system that provides rationed Telecommunication services. The highest profit margin area’s of Utah get ADSL2+ service, and everyone else doesn’t. Many of the area’s Utopia has rolled service to had no broadband what so ever from anyone.
Further Qwest’s ADSL2+(FTTN) service can not be used by any Utah based service provider. All of the jobs provided by these utah companies is being put in jeopardy by being unable to reach their customers after Qwest puts these upgrades in.
The major difference between our current Privately ran socialized system and the Utopia socialized system is that Utopia is not aloud to run services themselves , They are required by law to sell to any who wants access at wholesale rates. Already Utopia has shown alot of competition we have seen several new company’s move to utah to provide service in addition to the company’s already here. Utopia provides the community’s that have it the ability to determine their own fate, the ability to offer a service that attracts new business’s, and a vastly better communications service to their citizens.
I will also note that any amount of payout the city’s have to pay on the bond is still less then the federally-mandated fee’s that are on their Qwest bill, This would be true even if the whole total of the Utopia bonds had to be paid completely out of the pledges.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Jesse,
Do you see the irony in our statement in which you called me sophomoric and accused me of name-calling?
Here’s the deal, though. I happen to agree with you 100% regarding your second paragraph.
Paragraph number 1 was nothing but sophomoric name calling.
It’s interesting that you would be so sure that someone knows nothing about an issue when you know nothing about the person..
And, yes I do have a solution. The government should just stay the hell out of it, all of it.
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:22 pm
When you can put an end to all the things the government is doing atm to prop up the current system i will agree that.
things like…
- kill The Universal Service fund (state and federal)
- kill The broadband “stimulus”
- Prevent Telco incumbent lawsuits to prevent competitor market participation
- Prevent HOA/other groups suing new market entrants to prevent new infrastructure from being installed
- stop any form of exclusive agreement at any level of the last mile marketplace
- adjust easement rules for easier access.
- enforce existing rules that prevent an incumbent from selling services below cost when new entrants come to the market
- Their absolutely needs to be a method for a city to be able to obtain access to modern telcom services of their own defined standard in the event that no private market provider will do it.
Given the fact that in order to get all of these changes you would have to alter FCC rules, the 1996 telcom act, tort law, local easement rules, and actually enforce existing law i really don’t see any of it happening. Remember how long the Spanish American war tax toke to repeal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_telephone_excise_tax
Muni projects like Utopia is our only chance of getting a modern telcom infrastructure.
I don’t want a garden of perfect ideology I want practical solutions to the problems we have. Fixing all of the problems that the laughable American telcom “market” has is ludicrous notion at best.
July 6th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
JJL9: My insults are far too nuanced and complex to be called sophomoric.
And the question stands: now that government has spent decades insulating and building up one or two behemoth incumbents in each market, how do you level the playing field for new entrants? Saying “get the government out of it” makes for a nice sound bite, but how do you propose doing that without Qwest, Comcast, Frontier, or any other number of incumbents meddling in the process? How do you maintain universal service and prevent cherry-picking? These are important issues that need more than simplistic answers. Let’s see a real plan.
Pulling out and letting the chips fall where they may isn’t just impractical, it’s illogical. Remember what happened when we eased up via the Telco Act of ‘96? We ended up getting taken for $300B (and counting) while our infrastructure slid into an embarrassing 20th place. Easing restrictions actually resulted in fewer service providers and higher prices as telcos consolidated into a near-complete Ma Bell II.
Given what I know about telecom history and the difficulties of any private company attempting to overbuild, I think I was correct in calling you uninformed. I can’t see how anyone familiar with the “competitive” landscape could possibly say what you say.
July 9th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Jesse,
I won’t pretend to be as informed as you are about this issue, but I do know that as principles of sound government are violated, there are always unintended consequences. Solutions to these consequences that involve violating more principles of sound government will lead to digging the hole deeper and deeper.
Can you come up with a market-based solution or a solution that removes government regulation and intervention in a responsible way, a solution that does not involve encumbering the taxpayers?
July 9th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
Utopia is in fact a half market based solution, Utopia does not run any service on the network, they merely provide the wiring that private industry rides on to reach their customers.
This in fact is a very good compromise in the grand scheme of things, The city’s know best what their citizens need utility wise. The city’s already run several other utility’s because it just makes sense for them todo so.
The OPN or Open Provider Network model is a very effective solution for city’s to leverage in their efforts to insure their citizens have access to the privately ran telecommunications services they need. Utopia has clearly show That this model attracts plenty of Private business entrants to provide service. Many of the private providers on Utopia have services that are unavailable in incumbent held markets.