Chattanooga Times Free Press

After little debate, the state Senate voted 29-0 this morning to send compromise legislation that would let AT&T begin competing with cable companies to Gov. Phil Bredesen.

Just checked outside. Didn't see any AT&T or Charter trucks lined up competing for accounts. And still no AT&T DSL, four years later.

The TN House gives the big middle finger to local government and passes the AT&T cable bill, proving once again that bad legislation can be bought for the right price in Tennessee.

Does this mean I might at least get DSL now? I've only been waiting four years.

Joe Powell has an in-depth analysis of the "new and improved" AT&T statewide cable franchise bill. His conclusion in a nutshell:

The more I read of this plan, the more it seems to be a program geared to look out for the interests of AT&T and not for consumers.

Joe Powell's thorough analysis, backed with additional commentary by Bunnie Riedel of Riedel Communications, answers many questions about the bill and raises some ones regarding the players involved.

The Tennessean: AT&T, cable rivals agree on rules for TV:

After months of secret negotiations between AT&T and the cable industry, both sides have agreed on many of the ground rules for AT&T's entry into the television service business in Tennessee — including how many customers must get access and how many households must be in low-income neighborhoods.

According to the article, the compromise legislation will require 30% buildout within 3 1/2 years after introducing service. It will also provide for a 5% fee to local governments. There are also incentives in the form of buildout credits for rural broadband development. There's no mention of PEG (public, education, government) access requirements in the article.

UPDATE: Here's the bill with an executive summary. (PEG access is required for existing and new franchises.)

Joe Powell has the latest update.

I have not had time to study the new and improved "compromise" bill. Does it protect local control of rights of way? Does it prohibit cherry picking and require operators to build out into under served and economically disadvantaged areas? Does it protect local PEG and public cable access broadcasting?

Looks like Bredesen is set to cave in on the AT&T cable franchise bill. Coincidentally, his communications director has just left and gone to work for AT&T's lobbyist.

Gov. Bredesen cites the need to expand broadband access as the justification. I agree we need expanded broadband access. This is not, however, the way to achieve it.

Read the AP report here. More commentary at Volunteer Voters. Background on the bill here.

While AT&T is spending millions lobbying Tennessee legislators for a bill that establishes statewide cable franchises and eliminates local control of cable contracts, they are busy over in Mississippi (which has no such law) negotiating local government franchises.

The latest contracts are in Jackson and Horn Lake.

The lack of a statewide franchise doesn't seem to be holding AT&T back in Mississippi. Several local governments in Tennessee have invited them to submit a proposal. Why haven't they?

Meanwhile, Georgia passed the AT&T sponsored statewide franchise bill this year. Folks in Atlanta are now set to start saving big because of all the competition it brings. Well, at least a few of them:

The telecom giant says about 200 families in the metro Atlanta will get 300-plus channels piped into their homes — depending on the package, which can include up to 30 in high-definition — by the end of this year. Atlanta is the first city in the Southeast to get the service.

The article says the service will be available to more homes in 2008, but AT&T has not provided a rollout schedule or any details on what areas will be served.

(Also see: Andrew Eder and Joe Powell)

Following defeat of their bill in the last session of the Tennessee General Assembly, AT&T is suiting up for another run at a statewide cable/internet franchise bill that eliminates local control of cable franchises, regulates local franchise fees, restricts or eliminates customer service and quality standards, provides state regulation of local public right of way for the benefit of cable companies, restricts or eliminates local build-out requirements, and allows cable companies to create statewide franchises.

Andrew Eder at the Knoxville New Sentinel has an update with lots of good background on the controversy.

This was a huge battle last year, and AT&T has a history of bringing it up again and again to try to wear down opponents. They have been successful in several states.

For the play-by-play from the previous round and links to other blogs and info, see these posts at KnoxViews.