Caswell County, North Carolina

A new bill from Rep. Bill Faison (D-Orange, Caswell) would offer one North Carolina county the chance to build its own municipally-owned cable and broadband provider to deliver service to places other providers refuse to go.

H2067, “An Act to Allow Caswell County to Provide Internet Services, An Authorized Purpose Under Cable Television,” would authorize Caswell County to build its own municipal broadband system by adding cable television systems to a list of defined public enterprises.  That opens the door to selling bonds to raise private funds for system construction.

Faison told us that a 2005 ruling in the BellSouth (today AT&T) v. Laurinburg case, a state appeals court ruled that communities had the right to build systems to deliver broadband service to their residents.  He told IndyWeek there are many areas in his district and beyond that have been bypassed by cable and DSL service providers, with little hope in sight that many of the residents he represents would ever see anything beyond dial-up.

In making his case for the bill, Faison cited as an example electrical co-ops across the state that brought basic utilities services to under-served towns. “High speed internet is just as important today as electricity was in another era as a basic service,” said Faison, a proponent of municipal broadband.

“We need to supply to every one. Where AT&T will go and provide at a reasonable cost, I am happy to let them do it—but where they won’t go, someone must step up and bring that service to those people,” he added.

Faison

We had a few moments to talk to Rep. Faison about his bill and its timely introduction during the ongoing heated debate over S1209, a poison pill bill that would stop municipal broadband projects in the state.

He told us Caswell County officials appealed to him as their State Legislator to introduce the bill so they could move forward on their project, and H2067 concisely delivers within the parameters of the 2005 court case.

It will be interesting to watch progress on Faison’s H2067 in contrast to the anti-consumer S1209, introduced by Sen. David Hoyle (D-Gaston).  The only downside to Faison’s legislation is that it is limited to Caswell County.  But Faison also shows the way forward for other legislators to introduce similar bills to authorize projects in the areas of the state they represent.

For Caswell County residents, it means the potential to finally get quality broadband service after years of broken promises from incumbent providers.  Comcast of Danville, Virginia provides limited service, mostly in parts of Yanceyville, the county seat.  AT&T offers limited DSL service, but not to several areas of the county.  Those unlucky enough to be bypassed still rely mostly on dial-up.

Rep. Faison deserves your support for being a legislator that truly represents his constituents, and his actions illustrate he thinks of them first.  Please take a moment to write or call to thank him for his vision on this important issue and his support for getting the job done.

Rep. Bill Faison — [email protected] — (919) 715-3019

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Caswell County.flv[/flv]

Here is a senior citizen and a librarian in Caswell County, trying to live life without acceptable broadband.  These are real people with real stories to share. Broadband is not a luxury for these residents.  (4 minutes)

Once again, S1209 discussion was postponed Tuesday in the Senate Finance Committee.  No explanation for the change was given.  But before you get your hopes up, the bill is on the agenda for today at 1:00pm.

Brian Bowman of Save NC Broadband invites anyone in the Raleigh area to consider coming to the Legislative Office Building, Room 544 at 1pm this afternoon if you want to make your presence known to the Committee.

If you can’t go, please consider following through on our Call to Action and get in contact with your legislators and tell them to oppose S1209.

IndyWeek notes calls and messages opposing the bill are making an important impact:

Sen. William Purcell, a Democrat representing Anson, Richmond, Scotland, and Stanly counties, attended yesterday’s meeting, and said he cannot support S 1209 as written.

“I hope the bill is going to come back changed,” said Sen. Purcell. “I have had a lot of calls and emails from local governments in my district who are very concerned about this bill.”

Sen. Purcell is most concerned with the burden the bill places on local governments to apply for and receive General Obligation Bonds before implementing a broadband system or repairing an existing project. “Local governments going up against powerful communications people who have the money to do a large campaign against a broadband project during a general election, could make it virtually impossible for any city to put in their own system.”

Municipal cable and broadband consultant Catharine Rice of Action Audits said, “I think Sen. Clodfelter finally understands that there are negative impacts to Sen. Hoyle’s bill.”

“These Senators have to hear from the grassroots,” said Rice. “They need to hear from their own people who don’t want our state handed over to Time Warner Cable and AT&T.”

AT&T wants to sell its iPhone customers an overpriced insurance plan to cover damaged or lost phones.

Offered by mobile phone insurer Asurion, AT&T’s MobileProtect policy will be priced at $13.99 per month, with a steep deductible — $99 for an 8GB iPhone 3G to $199 for a 32GB iPhone 3GS.  If you lose or damage your phone, Asurion will repair or replace it with a refurbished equivalent or better iPhone model (their choice).

At those prices, iPhone insurance (and collectively most cell phone insurance plans) do not represent a good deal for consumers for several reasons:

1. The upfront cost is very high in relation to the value of the phone.  Over a typical two-year AT&T contract, Asurion will collect $335.76 to insure a $700 phone;
2. Asurion’s very high deductible reduces the company’s payout exposure by up to $200.  Assuming you break your phone in the last month of a two year contract, Asurion will have $535 of your money to work with, making their cost to replace the phone just $164.
3. Asurion does not guarantee customers will get a brand new iPhone.  Replacing a lost or broken iPhone with a refurbished model can significantly reduce Asurion’s costs and leave you with a questionable replacement;
4. The deal does not extend to current iPhone owners who have older phones that statistically would likely generate a higher percentage of claims.  In fact, customers will have to purchase coverage within 30 days of purchasing a brand new iPhone, giving Asurion the likelihood mechanical problems will be handled by Apple’s traditional warranty, reducing the insurer’s exposure to expensive claims.

There are a number of alternatives.  First, protect your phone with a suitable case or cover — scratches and impact damage are among the most common issues afflicting iPhones.  A few may afford some protection from water damage if the phone gets slightly wet, although a dunk in a pool or deep puddle is probably going to present a challenge for any case or covering.

Second, consider alternative insurance from companies like Squaretrade.  The company’s iPhone insurance costs $8 per month for 24 months, or $96 paid in full for an iPhone 3G. For a 32GB iPhone 3GS, it’s $9.99 per month, or $144 for 24 months of coverage.  Accidental damage claims have a $50 deductible.  But Squaretrade can cost even less when you take advantage of regular discount codes that provide up to 40 percent off.  Just do a Google search for Squaretrade coupons and discount codes, especially around holidays.  You have up to 90 days after purchasing your iPhone to buy Squaretrade coverage.

Squaretrade does not cover loss or theft, however.  You should check with your insurance agent for a personal property policy.  Most offer coverage for personal cell phone loss or theft for under $40 per year.  Many are sold as standalone policies that do not carry a traditional deductible commonly found on homeowner’s policies.  Better yet, making a claim under many of these types of policies generally will not impact your homeowner’s insurance policy, an important consideration when your claims history can impact your renewal rate.  Ask your insurance agent for details about what their cell phone insurance policies cover and what impact any claims might have on your other policies with the company (and their renewal rates.)  Many insurers will sell these policies on a standalone basis to customers who do no other business with the insurer, so shop around.

If your iPhone goes missing, virtually all insurers require a police report and most will either mail you a brand new iPhone or reimburse you for the purchase of an identical new phone you buy yourself at the non-subsidized price.

If none of these ideas appeal to you, consider establishing a savings account and deposit $14 a month into it, specifically to cover a portion of your costs to replace your iPhone if it is damaged or lost.  Although it won’t cover the full cost of the replacement, that $14 a month will always be your money.  If nothing goes wrong and you keep your phone in good condition over 24 months, that $335+ in accumulated savings is yours to keep.  That’s a better deal than giving it to Asurion.

[flv width=”512″ height=”308″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KTVI St Louis Cell Phone In Water 5-26-10.flv[/flv]

KTVI in St. Louis ran this silly segment about what you can do if your cell phone takes an involuntary dip in the pool.  (3 minutes)

The CTIA is the wireless industry's lobbying group

While the phone and cable companies attempt to fight off broadband reclassification at the FCC, the wireless industry has been pulling its own weight in an effort to convince legislators everything is wonderful in wireless, and no consumer protection regulations are necessary.

The CTIA, the wireless lobbying group, has been blogging on overdrive lately, trying to sell the idea Americans are already soaking in broadband options and competition that keeps prices low and innovation high.  Why regulate an industry that isn’t broken?

If only it were true.

While Americans in larger communities do have choices for broadband, for most it’s a matter of picking the phone or cable company for service.  That’s called a duopoly.  In the wireless marketplace, it’s hardly much better.  The nation’s largest wireless phone companies, AT&T and Verizon, have essentially colluded with near-identical pricing and service plan requirements that demand customers add mandatory “options” like data plan add-ons that raise wireless bills higher than ever.

The smaller providers eke out an existence mildly competing over pricing, but with their inherent coverage limitations or history of providing poor customer service, many consumers won’t consider doing business with them.  Relying on most wireless providers for broadband threatens the kind of huge bills you see on TV news reports, as carriers limit consumption to 5GB per month, and most charge enormous overlimit fees to customers exceeding the limit.

The Federal Communications Commission recently found one in every six Americans suffer “bill shock” syndrome — that all-too-familiar panicky feeling when you open a cell phone bill and discover an extra zero on the end of the dollar amount due.  More than a third of people who experienced bill shock said their bills jumped by at least $50 — around 23 percent said the increase was $100 or more.

Settles

That amounts to more than 30 million Americans, but the CTIA’s “see no evil, hear no evil” blog carries on claiming life is good for wireless consumers.  Besides, writes Steve Largent, president of the CTIA, consumers who took their complaints to the Better Business Bureau had them resolved 97.4 percent of the time.

Of course, that begs the question why consumers had to approach the BBB about their poor service experience in the first place.

I’m not the only one asking questions.  Craig Settles, an industry analyst, co-administrator of Communities United for Broadband and author of the report “Fighting the Next Good Fight: Bringing True Broadband to Your Community,” is also pondering the industry campaign to block broadband reform.

Settles penned a piece in today’s Roll Call exposing the fallacies from the industry’s PR machine:

The state of broadband — for consumers, businesses and nonprofits — isn’t the rosy picture the industry powerhouses attempt to paint. Ignoring this reality can lead to bad policy decisions and bad legislation.

[…]

Most states may technically have 60 to 80 Internet access providers. However, in practically every state, the combined statewide market share of all but the top five or six providers might total 5 percent, if you’re lucky. In at least half of the states, data show the combined market share of the top two providers ranges from 70 percent up to 95 percent. That represents near or actual duopolies, most often with one wireless and one cable provider as the undynamic duo.

Life at the local level, which is where your true subscriber options exist, further challenges the industry’s claim that people have choices. If you count “having choices” as living in an area where several companies advertise broadband service, or consider dial-up speed as broadband, OK.

But go door to door in rural counties and small towns. The reality you often find is one major carrier providing fair to poor service to some and no service to the rest, plus some small local providers with 2 percent or 3 percent market share struggling to provide decent service in the face of endless efforts to smite them from the planet. If you’re in one of the few states with four or five providers that each have statewide market share of 8 percent to 15 percent, it’s likely each provider is concentrated in a portion of the state, creating a local reality that’s worse than state statistics.

Settles notes that claims of “billions invested” only invites more questions about what carriers are doing with all that money.  Settles questions whether its wise to brag about spending $20 billion on infrastructure costs when municipal broadband projects in states like North Carolina, with IT staffs of fewer than 12, have built superior networks delivering 10 times the speed of its competitors.

The CTIA loves to tout the innovation wireless providers bring to customers, but in many cases they are claiming credit (and often getting a cut in the action) for someone else’s innovation, especially from the third-party apps market.

Too often the real innovations in wireless broadband have often come in spite of carriers that have sought to block, control, or “manage” someone else’s vision.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Freedom CTIA Ad Spot 5-2010.flv[/flv]

Watch as the CTIA wireless lobby tries to sell Americans on wireless innovation, much of which didn’t come from wireless companies at all.  (1 minute)

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Heath Shuler Campaign Ad.flv[/flv]

Congress doesn’t seem to know right from wrong, but we do.

It’s not right when big insurance companies write health care laws when millions can’t afford to see a doctor.

It’s not right when big oil companies write energy laws as gas prices skyrocket.

It’s not right when Congress passes trade bills that send our jobs overseas.

Congress won’t change until we change the people we’re sending to Washington.

–Rep. Heath Shuler’s 2006 campaign commercial

That was less than four years ago.  Apparently these days Rep. Heath Shuler (D-North Carolina) believes it -is- right for large telecommunications companies to censor online content, slow down Internet services they don’t want you to use, and allow the phone and cable industry to control broadband policies in this country.

Shuler’s abandonment of his mountain values was made easier with $23,000 in campaign contributions from a grateful industry.

Shuler

When those telecom checks cleared the bank, Shuler went to work for big telecom companies, becoming a leading opponent of consumer-friendly Net Neutrality.

For his supporters who once had high hopes for the Democratic congressman first elected in 2006, it’s been one disappointment after another.

Last fall, Shuler was a co-signer of a letter to FCC chairman Julius Genachowski opposing Net Neutrality.  To reiterate the point, many of the same co-signers of last fall’s letter were back on board with a second letter sent last month.

The latest letter was a godsend to AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and other Net Neutrality opponents who are using it to suggest there is considerable bipartisan opposition to broadband reform.

Many of his constituents are not impressed with Shuler’s legislative record these days.  One of them is Dave Houck:

I have long since had it with Mr. Shuler.  I admit it, I have no more patience for him.

[…]

I campaigned for you, and phone banked for you, and made cash contributions.  Today I find out that you are against net neutrality, that you signed a letter to the FCC Chairman supporting AT&T and other large corporations — choosing corporations over the people.

In 2010 I will be voting for anybody who runs against you, Democrat or Republican, as you have consistently demonstrated in the three years you have been in Congress that you are quite simply not up to the job of representing the people of Western North Carolina.  You and the “Blue Dog Coalition” are surrogates for corporate interests; you do not have the interests of the people of North Carolina at heart.  Or at least that’s the message you are sending to me.

I’m just fed up.

North Carolina's 11th District is currently served by Rep. Heath Shuler

Similar sentiments from upset residents in his district are voiced all over Shuler’s Facebook page.  Why not add yours?

Then give his office a call or drop him an e-mail.

Ask Rep. Shuler how standing with big phone and cable companies against consumer broadband protection could ever represent western North Carolina mountain values.

Tell him trusting AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and Time Warner Cable with our broadband future is like trusting BP to protect the Gulf Coast.

Let him know you were disappointed with his decision to sign the first letter opposing Net Neutrality last fall, but now you are simply appalled he’s done it again.

It’s not right when big phone and cable companies have the power to write their own legislation and stop pro-consumer protections like Net Neutrality.  Where is the Rep. Shuler who campaigned on doing the right thing in 2006?

If Shuler won’t change his mind on an issue as important as this, perhaps we need to take his own advice and change the person the 11th district sends to Congress.