Georgia House backs bill to let local power companies sell internet (Atlanta: power lines, buy)

[LynnHarris1]

The Georgia House voted unanimously Monday to expand internet access in rural areas by allowing local electricity cooperatives to sell online service.

The legislation, House Bill 23, would permit Georgia’s 41 electric membership corporations to offer high-speed internet service as well as power. EMCs often serve sparsely populated areas where major providers such as AT&T and Comcast haven’t necessarily built internet lines..."

FULL STORY: https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regi...jptE9KVofig5H/

SOURCE: AJC

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by LynnHarris1

The Georgia House voted unanimously Monday to expand internet access in rural areas by allowing local electricity cooperatives to sell online service.

The legislation, House Bill 23, would permit Georgia’s 41 electric membership corporations to offer high-speed internet service as well as power. EMCs often serve sparsely populated areas where major providers such as AT&T and Comcast haven’t necessarily built internet lines..."

FULL STORY: https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regi...jptE9KVofig5H/

SOURCE: AJC

I think this is great! The technology to provide broadband over power lines has been around for well over two decades, but folks were reticent to plug into the power line... Go figure.

[citidata18]

Sounds good in theory, but then there's the fact that folks in Metro Atlanta will basically subsidize the service they provide if the bill below passes.

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regi...fdEWQJTmggvJI/

So much for Republicans being against redistribution of wealth, huh?

[midgeorgiaman]

Originally Posted by citidata18

Sounds good in theory, but then there's the fact that folks in Metro Atlanta will basically subsidize the service they provide if the bill below passes.

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regi...fdEWQJTmggvJI/

So much for Republicans being against redistribution of wealth, huh?

Yes. This bill is garbage and basically welfare for rural Georgia. There are pros and cons for everything. Rural Georgia has a lower cost of living, no traffic, clean air and water, etc. The cons are the lack of availability of services. Rural Georgia can get internet, but they should pay for it. Why should everyone else pay for It? Georgia Republicans apparently like welfare if it subsidizes their base. No, no, no.

Originally Posted by LynnHarris1

The Georgia House voted unanimously Monday to expand internet access in rural areas by allowing local electricity cooperatives to sell online service.

The legislation, House Bill 23, would permit Georgia’s 41 electric membership corporations to offer high-speed internet service as well as power. EMCs often serve sparsely populated areas where major providers such as AT&T and Comcast haven’t necessarily built internet lines..."

FULL STORY: https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regi...jptE9KVofig5H/

SOURCE: AJC

Then this. Sounds good. Why are legislators worried about minimum speeds? Shouldn't the market dictate that? Right now, they can get 25Mbps with satellite internet...They just don't want to pay for it...and want others to subsidize it. Nope.

[markjames68]

Originally Posted by citidata18

Sounds good in theory, but then there's the fact that folks in Metro Atlanta will basically subsidize the service they provide if the bill below passes.

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regi...fdEWQJTmggvJI/

So much for Republicans being against redistribution of wealth, huh?

These are separate bills. I didn’t see anything about the EMCs getting subsidized, just that they are able to provide service if they so choose.

[markjames68]

Originally Posted by midgeorgiaman

Yes. This bill is garbage and basically welfare for rural Georgia. There are pros and cons for everything. Rural Georgia has a lower cost of living, no traffic, clean air and water, etc. The cons are the lack of availability of services. Rural Georgia can get internet, but they should pay for it. Why should everyone else pay for It? Georgia Republicans apparently like welfare if it subsidizes their base. No, no, no.



Then this. Sounds good. Why are legislators worried about minimum speeds? Shouldn't the market dictate that? Right now, they can get 25Mbps with satellite internet...They just don't want to pay for it...and want others to subsidize it. Nope.

Again, separate bills. Kemp is not in favor of taxing Netflix, etc.

And the market would dictate it - if an EMC provides lousy service and there is a cable option, which do you think the consumer would likely pick?

The problem is when there is a monopoly - only satellite internet as an option. While better than nothing the latency and other performance issues don’t make it reliable enough for some.

For rural Georgians who are on the grid this makes a lot of sense. Even lower speed reliable internet will be valuable.

[citidata18]

Originally Posted by markjames68

These are separate bills.

They're separate, but clearly complementary.

What would stop EMCs from using the revenue generated from the Netflix tax to expand Broadband service to rural areas? Furthermore, do you think it's merely a coincidence that both bills are being introduced at the same time

[markjames68]

Originally Posted by citidata18

They're separate, but clearly complementary.

What would stop EMCs from using the revenue generated from the Netflix tax to expand Broadband service to rural areas? Furthermore, do you think it's merely a coincidence that both bills are being introduced at the same time

It may not be coincidental, but it also doesn’t mean that both will be passed. What would be worse if they were the same bill.

Is there a valid definition of “rural”? I buy electricity from an EMC but am in North Fulton. If I can get internet as an option it’ll help keep other prices competitive. But I’m obviously not in a rural area.

[citidata18]

Originally Posted by markjames68

It may not be coincidental, but it also doesn’t mean that both will be passed. What would be worse if they were the same bill.

Is there a valid definition of “rural”? I buy electricity from an EMC but am in North Fulton. If I can get internet as an option it’ll help keep other prices competitive. But I’m obviously not in a rural area.

It's possible both may not pass. But the passage of both is the intent.

Also, the point is that's your choice and, as things stand now, other taxpayers aren't forced to subsidize it.

For the record, I don't have an issue with the proposals. I have no problem paying more in taxes to help fellow citizens.

It's just the hypocrisy that I don't like. This is the same party that cries about *their* taxpayer dollars being redistributed to others, yet they're perfectly ok with *other* people's taxpayer dollars being redistributed if it's for the benefit of their base.

[midgeorgiaman]

Originally Posted by citidata18

It's possible both may not pass. But the passage of both is the intent.

Also, the point is that's your choice and, as things stand now, other taxpayers aren't forced to subsidize it.

For the record, I don't have an issue with the proposals. I have no problem paying more in taxes to help fellow citizens.

It's just the hypocrisy that I don't like. This is the same party that cries about *their* taxpayer dollars being redistributed to others, yet they're perfectly ok with *other* people's taxpayer dollars being redistributed if it's for the benefit of their base.

This is me...exactly. We have subsidized roads, schools, etc. I really don't have an issue if state tax dollars are used, but to tax those who "have" exclusively to pay for those who don't is completely wrong and so against GOP core values. State dollars including those from rural GA to help MARTA---bad, but taking urban dollars to help rural GA is good? Really. Complete hypocrisy.