Little Victory Will Mean Big Difference

Consumers won a little-noticed but potentially huge victory recently, when the Federal Communications Commission issued a report documenting remarkable growth in the market for high-speed Internet access.

The report noted that dozens of companies are pouring billions of dollars into developing ways for businesses and consumers to use the Internet quickly and painlessly.

The result will revolutionize the Internet as a business and consumer tool, with “always on” access, no more long waits for search results and an end to those annoying busy signals during peak-use hours.

Most important, the commission’s report represents a stinging rebuke to the Bell monopolies and the Internet monopoly wannabe, America Online.

Those companies have been on a multimillion dollar crusade to persuade local regulators to pass “open access” laws. These regulations would require local cable networks to share their lines with Internet service providers.

The FCC affirmed that the private sector is far better able to deliver the benefits of high-speed Internet access to consumers on its own, without any “helping hand” from government regulators.

Call it the second great Internet Revolution, one that builds on the development of the Internet itself and promises to make it a faster, easier experience for everyone.

The report concluded that Internet technology is developing at a phenomenal pace, with no one industry or Internet provider cornering the market. It also noted that as an industry the Internet is still in its infancy. The report recommended a course of regulatory restraint - a hands-off approach to Internet development.

The commission should be applauded for both its research and its desire to move away from policies that would bog down Internet growth.

If recent history teaches anything, it’s that consumers establish policy in the marketplace by voting with their dollars.

Most often, when consumers have choice and opportunity, they tend to vote for the carrier with the widest range of services at the most competitive prices.

So what does this mean for those of you still waiting for that file to download, hoping your connection isn’t interrupted? Just look at California.

Earlier this year, California consumers who wanted quality, high-speed Internet access had only one choice. For a ridiculously high fee of $89.95 a month, SBC Communications-Pacific Bell, which holds the monopoly on local calling in California, provided Internet service over a standard telephone line.

Then the prospect of competition emerged from AT&T’s new cable service. Suddenly, SBC-Pac Bell decided it didn’t need to charge $89.95 a month after all. It cut its monthly service price to $39.95. That’s $600 a year in savings.

California is not alone. In the Rocky Mountain states, US West has dropped its own high-speed access price from $59.95 to $29.95 a month, but only after the prospect of competition from cable.

With experiences like these being replicated across the nation, it’s obvious why the Bell companies are so eager to hobble cable Internet service.

The advent of competition from cable will cost them hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue. But as California shows, their loss truly is consumers’ gain.

The Bell monopolies and AOL will likely continue their well-funded campaign for “open access.” But thanks to the FCC, the rest of us have the ammunition to give their self-serving campaign the short shrift it deserves.