Veto of telephone
company proposal
harms consumers

  The hurricane-battered citizens of Louisiana have to feel as puzzled and disappointed as we do over Gov. Kathleen Blanco's veto of procompetition, proconsumer and pro-employment legislation last week.
  In rejecting legislation that had been passed by both the House of Representatives and Senate, the governor said she was concerned that the measure might result in a potential loss of revenues to local communities if telephone companies were to compete with cable companies under statewide franchise agreements instead of franchises negotiated in each local community. That contorted logic leaves us shaking our heads in consternation and wonder. As we are visiting Louisiana this week for our annual conference, it seems to us that, more than any other state, the residents of Louisiana need the investment dollars, jobs, infrastructure and new 21st-century networks that this bill would have brought them. Unfortunately, Gov. Blanco blocked this with one stroke of her pen.
  Telephone companies have long been regulated at the state level and Louisiana legislators were wise to see the parallels of statewide franchising the telephone companies to provide video service over the very same lines they use to bring telephone service into homes and small businesses.
  The measure called for the telephone companies to pay franchise fees and subscription-related charges to the state, which could have disbursed the funding to local communities for needed services.   Thus, new revenue would not have been lost; it would merely have come from Baton Rouge rather than directly from franchisees.
Instead, the governors veto means outdated rules that have been in place for more than 40 years will continue to discourage investment that would lead to more jobs, lower prices for consumers and better service - as a result of more open competition in video services.
  Cable TV companies that today offer telephone service over their connections to the homes and businesses they serve did not need a separate local franchise agreement before they started offering telephone service. They simply took advantage of their technology to add to the capabilities they could offer their customers.
  It seems unfair to us, then, to impose outdated local video franchise rules on telephone companies if they're ready to invest in wider deployment of fiber-optic lines in local communities throughout Louisiana, which certainly could benefit from high-capacity, broadband digital networks.
  We fail to see the sense in discouraging telephone companies from making those investments and adding much-needed video choice, not to mention more jobs to the state's economy because of cumbersome local-franchise requirements. We can only react with disbelief that adhering to a decades-old principle of local control apparently outweighs the prospect of hundreds, if not thousands, of good-paying jobs in a state where new employment opportunities are needed so desperately.
  Harry C. Afford is president of the National Black Chamber of Commerce based In Washington, D.C.

Crowley Post Signal • 602 North Parkerson Avenue • Crowley, LA
Ph: 337-783-3450 • Fax: 337-788-0949