IPcentral Weblog
  The DACA Blog

Wednesday, April 14, 2004

 
The Battle is Joined in Ohio - By the PUC!
(previous | next)
 

The Public Utility Commission of Ohio (PUCO) posted this fact sheet yesterday to explain an interim wholesale ruling from March. By way of background, the order has been stayed pending appeals. The state also has the lowest UNE-L rate and third lowest UNE-P rate in the nation.

Typically, the media and message battles are pretty heated in an effort to shape the debate over wholesale regulation. One side says that A is good and B is bad. The other side says the reverse. After enough newspaper, television and radio advertisements, a handful of politicians or community leaders voice support for one position or the other. This is very familiar terrain for anyone who watches telecom policy.

However, it is unique to see the regulators wade into the middle of these industry foodfights. That is what makes the PUCO publication so interesting. Not only does it say "Competition Ohio has been misleading Ohio's telephone consumers" but it goes on to emphasize, "Competition Ohio is not a consumer advocacy group." (Emphasis in original.) PUCO essentially calls out AT&T for funding a lobbying effort guised as a consumer protection group.

An earlier blog post on the Ohio ruling provides more detail on the situation. Adam's analysis of the warring factions hit the nail on the head: "So long as a certain segment anticipates a non-trivial chance to get something for nothing from regulators, they will try to do so." For the regulatory combatants in Ohio, it must have been a surprise to see a new cost imposed on their efforts to game public opinion. That's one cost imposed by regulators that I wouldn't mind seeing more often.

posted by @ 3:13 PM | General

Share |

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly

Post a Comment:





 
Blog Main
RSS Feed  
Recent Posts
  EFF-PFF Amicus Brief in Schwarzenegger v. EMA Supreme Court Videogame Violence Case
New OECD Study Finds That Improved IPR Protections Benefit Developing Countries
Hubris, Cowardice, File-sharing, and TechDirt
iPhones, DRM, and Doom-Mongers
"Rogue Archivist" Carl Malamud On How to Fix Gov2.0
Coping with Information Overload: Thoughts on Hamlet's BlackBerry by William Powers
How Many Times Has Michael "Dr. Doom" Copps Forecast an Internet Apocalypse?
Google / Verizon Proposal May Be Important Compromise, But Regulatory Trajectory Concerns Many
Two Schools of Internet Pessimism
GAO: Wireless Prices Plummeting; Public Knowledge: We Must Regulate!
Archives by Month
  September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
  - (see all)
Archives by Topic
  - A La Carte
- Add category
- Advertising & Marketing
- Antitrust & Competition Policy
- Appleplectics
- Books & Book Reviews
- Broadband
- Cable
- Campaign Finance Law
- Capitalism
- Capitol Hill
- China
- Commons
- Communications
- Copyright
- Cutting the Video Cord
- Cyber-Security
- DACA
- Digital Americas
- Digital Europe
- Digital Europe 2006
- Digital TV
- E-commerce
- e-Government & Transparency
- Economics
- Education
- Electricity
- Energy
- Events
- Exaflood
- Free Speech
- Gambling
- General
- Generic Rant
- Global Innovation
- Googlephobia
- Googlephobia
- Human Capital
- Innovation
- Intermediary Deputization & Section 230
- Internet
- Internet Governance
- Internet TV
- Interoperability
- IP
- Local Franchising
- Mass Media
- Media Regulation
- Monetary Policy
- Municipal Ownership
- Net Neutrality
- Neutrality
- Non-PFF Podcasts
- Ongoing Series
- Online Safety & Parental Controls
- Open Source
- PFF
- PFF Podcasts
- Philosophy / Cyber-Libertarianism
- Privacy
- Privacy Solutions
- Regulation
- Search
- Security
- Software
- Space
- Spectrum
- Sports
- State Policy
- Supreme Court
- Taxes
- The FCC
- The FTC
- The News Frontier
- Think Tanks
- Trade
- Trademark
- Universal Service
- Video Games & Virtual Worlds
- VoIP
- What We're Reading
- Wireless
- Wireline
Archives by Author
PFF Blogosphere Archives
We welcome comments by email - look for a link to the author's email address in the byline of each post. Please let us know if we may publish your remarks.
 










The Progress & Freedom Foundation