Massachusetts Telecommunications
Symposium
July 26, 2004
Public Policy – Legal Overview
Jim Baller
The Baller Herbst Law Group, PC
Washington, DC
(202) 833-1144
Jim@Baller.com
Disclaimer
This presentation does not constitute legal advice
and should not be interpreted as such. For advice
on Massachusetts or local law, please consult your
Massachusetts counsel.
Jim Baller
Baller Herbst - Fiber Projects
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bristol, VA
Chelan County, WA
Crawfordsville, IN
Dalton, GA
Danville, VA
Jacksonville, FL
Kutztown, PA
North Kansas City, MO
• Provo, UT
• Rockford, IL
• Rock Springs Green River, WY
• Lafayette, LA
• Tri-Cities, IL
• UTOPIA, UT
• Others …
Cable Modems and DSL – No Big Deal!
“It is important to note here that the current generation of
broadband technologies (cable and DSL) may prove
woefully insufficient to carry many of the advanced
applications driving future demand.
Today’s broadband
will be tomorrow’s traffic jam, and the need for speed will
persist as new applications and services gobble up
existing bandwidth.”
Office of Technology Policy, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Understanding Broadband Demand: A Review of Critical Issues,
at 6 (Sept. 2002)
Bandwidth Comparisons
64Kbps Phone Line
128Kbps ISDN
3Mbps DSL
600Kbps DSL
1.544Mbps T1
3.7Mbps MPEG-2
CBR VHS Quality
Video Stream
10Mbps Ethernet
100Mbps Ethernet
20Mbps MPEG-2 CBR
HDTV Quality Video
Stream
Work at home
By Jonathan Moore
Educational &
Medical
Applications
Developments at the National Level
• Federal law does not authorize public entry
• Public entities must have state and local authority
• Several states currently have barriers to public entry
• AR, FL, GA, MN, MO, NE, NV, SC, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI
• Nixon v. Missouri Municipal League
• Term “any entity” in TA 253(a) not clear enough for preemption
• Not a decision on merits of municipal entry
• Municipalities have “a respectable position” on public interest
• FCC “denounced” policies behind Missouri law
• Many amici curiae supported municipalities
National Developments (2)
• We did well in state legislatures in 2004, but the
incumbents will be back
• Likely push by all sides in next 2 Congresses
• Vicious battles before agencies, courts, city councils
• Unstable regulatory environment – e.g., Brand X,
Wireline NPRM, BPL, VoIP, IP-Enabled, UNEs, etc.
• Potential impact of elections
Massachusetts
• Municipalities have “home rule” (with some limitations)
• Municipal electric utilities have express authority to
provide telecom services
• Municipalities can establish cable systems
• No current state restrictions on these or other services
• Must follow procedures very carefully
• Must review local ordinances, bonds, contracts, etc.
• Municipalities can band together for joint action
Thanks!