Last week, Catharine Rice and I were guests on a Democracy Now! segment filmed at the Freedom to Connect conference. We discussed what community broadband is, how it has benefited communities, and how a few big cable and telephone companies are trying to stop it.

CONSIDER your last electrical appliance purchase. Did you pause to think if your home could handle the increased electrical demand? No, because our electrical networks are built around the principle of abundance, not scarcity. If the massive cable companies ran our electrical grid like they do their broadband networks, we would have to do without air conditioning, which puts a heavy strain on the grid during peak demand. In contrast, the cable networks get congested during periods of peak activity, failing to deliver the “up to” speed promised in their advertising. Some new network builders are embracing a different approach, one that has major implications for the future of innovation: adopting a business model of abundance rather than scarcity.

The Tar Heel economy is continuing its transition from tobacco and textiles to high technology. Internet startups populate the Research Triangle, and Charlotte’s financial services economy depends on high-quality data connections. Truly, next-generation Internet connections are crucial to the state. It is deeply disturbing that the Federal Communications Commission ranks North Carolina at the bottom nationally – tied with Mississippi – in the percentage of households subscribing to a “basic broadband” connection. The residents and businesses of nearly every other state have superior connections.

We are pleased to announce that an excerpt of our report, Chanute's Gig: One Rural Kansas Community's Tradition of Innovation Led to A Gigabit and Ubiquitous Wireless Coverage, is now highlighted in the newest Broadband Communities Magazine. The November/December 2012 issue focuses on economic development.

Editors chose our report because it shows how a community can successfully develop a network to address community needs. The result is greater economic development and a range of increased community benefits. In addition to our report, several other articles focus on economic development and come from authors such as Reed Hundt and Blair Levin, Doug Adams and Michael Curri, Ken Demlow, Craig Settles, and David Moore.

You can access the digital edition online and see the entire issue table of contents at Broadband Communities Magazine Online.

You can still download the full report from the ILSR website and check out some of our other resources including case studies, fact sheets, video and audio.

I am going to be on Gigabit Nation today with Craig Settles, a live call-in show, from 2-3 Eastern time. You can listen online here both during the show and after, when the recording will be made available.

Craig put together this summary:

The National Association of Counties (NACo) gave us permission to reprint an article they recently wrote in their County News publication. NACo advocates for county governments on federal policy that impacts local decsion and local control. NACo is based in Washington, D.C.

In the article, author Charles Taylor discusses the perils of Oconee and Orangeburg Counties in South Carolina, both involved in broadband projects supported by stimulus funds. Because of a new law passed this past summer, those projects are in danger and the possibility of future projects is all but extinguished.

Rural counties' broadband projects face uncertainty

The success of two South Carolina counties’ plans to provide broadband access to rural areas could be in jeopardy because of a new state law that severely restricts public broadband projects. It also essentially bans new ones.

Oconee and Orangeburg counties received more than $27 million in federal stimulus funds in 2010 for rural broadband projects.

A South Carolina law, enacted in July, requires local governments that offer broadband Internet services to charge rates similar to those of private companies, even if the government could provide the service at a lower cost and the area is not served by commercial providers.

“It effectively prohibits municipalities from operating their own broadband systems through a series of regulatory and reporting requirements,” said Catharine Rice, president of the SouthEast Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (SEATOA). “These practically guarantee municipalities could never find financing because the requirements would render even a private sector broadband company inoperable.”

In the meantime, local communities are taking matters into their own hands and have created remarkable citywide fiber-to-the-home broadband networks. Many offer services directly to residents, providing a much-needed alternative to the cable and telephone companies. And by creating meaningful consumer choice among competitors, these networks are driving lower prices—spurring new investment and creating new jobs—and keeping more money circulating in the local economy.

The Institute for Local Self-Reliance has recently posted an examination of 1999 Iowa Act Chapter 63, which expressly allows municipal networks:

Section 1. LEGISLATIVE INTENT. It is the intent of the general assembly to specifically provide that cities of Iowa which create city utilities in the manner provided by law are authorized to provide on a competitively neutral basis with existing local exchange carriers separate or combined cable communications or television, telephone, telecommunications systems or services, including wireless systems or services, through the ownership of systems or offering of the services.

Sec. 2. Section 362.2, subsection 6, Code 1999, is amended to read as follows:
6. “City utility” means all or part of a waterworks, gasworks, sanitary sewage system, storm water drainage system, electric light and power plant and system, heating plant, cable communication or television system, telephone or telecommunications systems or services offered separately or combined with any system or service specified in this subsection or authorized by other law, any of which are owned by a city, including all land, easements, rights of way, fixtures, equipment, accessories, improvements, appurtenances, and other property necessary or useful for the operation of the utility.

The 1999 legislation opened the door for Iowa communities wanting to provide broadband access in areas that had been overlooked by the private sector. Since 1999, however, lobbyists for the telecommunications industry have found ways to increase regulation of community networks that does not apply to the private sector.

In addition to an analysis of how this rule changed Iowa's approach to networks, ILSR summarizes detailed changes in the original legislation. The analysis includes pros and cons and how the telecom lobby has influenced the Iowa law since its inception.

Read more here in the ILSR Rules Library.