Working its way through Louisiana's State Legislature is Senate Bill 10, which involves entry by electricity cooperatives into the broadband Internet access services market. A previous bill on this subject, Senate Bill 406, was vetoed by Louisiana's Governor, on account of that bill's authorization for electric co-op entry into the broadband market only unserved areas. It was claimed, in Governor Jonathan Bel Edwards' veto message for SB 406, that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 "specifically prohibits any state statute from prohibiting the ability of any entity to provide any telecommunication service." This was an apparent reference to Section 253(a) of the 1996 Act.
However, it is quite unlikely that the 1996 Act prohibits states from conditioning electric co-ops' entry in the broadband market on serving only unserved areas. Such a sweeping result follows from a hyper-literal reading of the statute. Electric co-ops are rate-regulated monopolies that are authorized for the specialized purpose of delivering electricity. It's not reasonable to think that the 1996 Act effectively rewrote the laws of every state to give electric co-ops charter to enter the broadband Internet services business and operate wherever they want. In passing the 1996 Act, Congress undoubtedly was particularly concerned with competitive entry by private market providers and not by government-sanctioned monopolies.
Louisiana SB 10, which is pending as of this post, does not contain the proviso that electric co-ops may only provide service in unserved areas. However, SB 10 does impose on electric co-op providers of broadband Internet services a non-discrimination provision regarding pole attachment rates. If, in the name of increasing access, states want to take the risk of authorizing electric co-ops to enter the broadband market, those co-ops should be required to make their utility poles available to competing broadband providers on a non-discriminatory basis. Otherwise, electric co-ops could use their monopoly power to impose above-market pole attachment rates on other providers and harm competition. SB 10's non-discrimination provision is good sense.
However, it is quite unlikely that the 1996 Act prohibits states from conditioning electric co-ops' entry in the broadband market on serving only unserved areas. Such a sweeping result follows from a hyper-literal reading of the statute. Electric co-ops are rate-regulated monopolies that are authorized for the specialized purpose of delivering electricity. It's not reasonable to think that the 1996 Act effectively rewrote the laws of every state to give electric co-ops charter to enter the broadband Internet services business and operate wherever they want. In passing the 1996 Act, Congress undoubtedly was particularly concerned with competitive entry by private market providers and not by government-sanctioned monopolies.
Louisiana SB 10, which is pending as of this post, does not contain the proviso that electric co-ops may only provide service in unserved areas. However, SB 10 does impose on electric co-op providers of broadband Internet services a non-discrimination provision regarding pole attachment rates. If, in the name of increasing access, states want to take the risk of authorizing electric co-ops to enter the broadband market, those co-ops should be required to make their utility poles available to competing broadband providers on a non-discriminatory basis. Otherwise, electric co-ops could use their monopoly power to impose above-market pole attachment rates on other providers and harm competition. SB 10's non-discrimination provision is good sense.
Posts
