| reply to SD6
Re: Are redlining enabling accusations a red herring? said by SD6:"Critics of the bill contend it . . . would allow build-out redlining (offering advanced broadband services to only the most dense and affluent areas)." As I understand it, federal laws and regulations ALREADY ALLOW companies to choose which jurisidctions they will serve. Yes, the local franchise authority can require a complete buildout but that's only within that jurisdiction. There is nothing NOW that prevents companies from only going into dense and affluent cities or suburbs while ignoring rural or poor jurisdictions. If I am wrong, then please correct me with a link. (I am not passing judgment on the current structure just saying that's the way it is.) So this legislation does not "enable" redlining, does it? Your deductions are correct.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page |
Talis
join:2001-06-21
Houston, TX | Your deductions may or may not be correct, depending on how you are defining what a jurisdiction is. If the entire area within the city limits is a jurisdictional area, then YES, this bill would promote red-lining. By not allowing the jurisdictional authority to mandate that service within its jurisditional boundaries be provided to ALL citizens, broadband service providers would be able to cherry-pick areas WITHIN a jurisdiction, skipping any areas it chose.
The ability to skip whole jurisdictions is not what this is about since, as you say, they already do that. |
