[TriLUG] Call and urge Perdue to veto H.129 or it becomes law tonight!

[matt at noway2.thruhere.net]

One thing to keep in mind is that this is not the first time that an
attempt has been made to pass this (or at least a very similar) bill. 
Quoting from a slashdot article (link:
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/08/27/1724249/State-Senator-Admits-Cable-Industry-Helped-Write-Pro-Industry-Legislation
)

"The veteran state senator says cities should leave broadband to the cable
companies. 'It's not fair for any government unit to compete with private
enterprise,' he says. In the last legislative session Sen. Hoyle tried to
put a moratorium on any more local governments expanding into municipal
broadband. When the I-Team asked him if the cable industry drew up the
bill, Senator Hoyle responded, 'Yes, along with my help.' When asked about
criticism that he was 'carrying water' for the cable companies, Hoyle
replied, 'I've carried more water than Gunga Din for the business
community — the people who pay the taxes.'"

So, as you contemplate this and other things that our legislature has been
up to these days: Are they really representing YOU or YOUR interests?  If
you voted any of them into office, are you happy with what you've gotten
in return?

> On 05/20/2011 12:10 PM, David Burton wrote:
>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Steve Pinkham
>> <steve.pinkham at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> In the 21 century, how are roads and Internet access so different that
>>> our laws must treat them so differently?
>>
>>
>> There's no competition in roads, and the nature of roads means that,
>> generally, no competition between roads is possible.
>>
>> Dave
> That's not the case from history. Most roads *were* private roads at
> first.  There was a lot of public/private competition early on, we just
> found that public ownership made sense for most of the reasons this bill
> is trying to squash in Internet access.
>
> The Internet is infrastructure for the 21st century.  If that model
> works for sewer, water, roads, etc, why should we impoverish ourselves
> at the expense of corporations for many years to come by enshrining in
> law that the benefits of public last mile ownership are illegal?
>
> This law removes the benefits of public ownership and leaves only the
> downsides.  The FCC agrees.
>
> http://stopthecap.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/MLC-Statement-on-Anti-Municipal-Broadband-Legislation-FINAL.pdf
>
> It is just too early in the game to cripple the public sector in this
> way.  We cannot afford to be so short-sighted.  If I'm correct, this
> bill will cripple our competitiveness for decades to come.  If your
> point of view is correct Time Warner might make a slightly lower profit.
>  Are you a gambling man?