Comments on: Where not Why Incumbents Failed in Texas?

By: Harold Feld

Harold Feld — Thu, 09 Jun 2005 22:46:23 +0000

From Maine to India to Florida, there seem to be an awful lot of accidents.

Yes, SBC shot themselves in the foot big time by linking the two issues. The franchising issue brought out mayors who don’t have any plan to do muni deployments, and the deployment issue brought in a lot of folks who normally wouldn’t have paid much attention to a franchising issue.

But that doesn’t make this an “accident” any more than the fact that the Florida munis were willing to spend money to protect their turf was an “accident” or that
mayors in Indiana were willing to organize to fight was an “accident.” Two overlapping interests saw how to help each other, and they did. Now they have a relationship if the SBC folks try to push this separately.

It is also interesting to contrast this to Nebraska, where the munis chose to try to cut a deal with the anti-muni forces. They got rolled in the last days of the legislature because they had no one to help them.

Happily, the industry continues to be buffdled by democracy in action, so I expect we’ll keep having “accidents.”

Harold Feld
Media Access Project

By: Bill Gurley

Bill Gurley — Wed, 08 Jun 2005 19:54:27 +0000

To suggest that, “had the cable part been figured out,” muni-wireless would have been banned (as Fleishman does) is waaaayyyyy off base. The incumbents were unable (and failed) at getting the Texas Senate to pick up this cause. For anyone that understands how the two parts of our government works that equals failure (no new law created). More over, the reason that the anti-muni wireless supporters chose to attach it to another bill is “precisely” because they knew it wouldn’t get passed by itself.

Let’s be realistic about what happened.

By: Fergie

Fergie — Wed, 08 Jun 2005 14:37:07 +0000

...and don't forget Save Muni Wireless! - ferg