Thursday, December 13, 2007

TV in the Nanny State

Not that I think ANYONE other than market demand should determine who does business where, but honestly, why do we have to move central planning to the State level?
Madison - The Assembly on Tuesday approved a cable regulation overhaul that would require state government - and no longer local governments - to issue franchises to cable TV companies.

[...]

Sponsors of the bill said it will foster competition that will hold down costs for consumers. But opponents said it will eventually starve public-access channels that now rely on fees charged by local governments and make it harder for consumers to resolve complaints about cable TV and satellite-dish services.

Doyle still has to review the final bill before deciding whether to sign it, said his spokesman Matt Canter. Canter added that Doyle supports competition and believes the proposal would offer greater competition in the market and more choices for consumers.

[...]

Under the bill, companies wanting permanent franchises would apply to the state Department of Financial Institutions. But it would be up to the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to investigate complaints about cable and, for the first time, satellite dish service.
Since when is this the role of government? Why do I have to complain to the State about my cable service? Oh that's right, when government gives out contracts to these companies, they practically maintain a MONOPOLY in the region. I lose the power of my money to choose someone else. So much for the free market...

Go figure, and idiot nanny state liberal like Doyle would support this measure and attempt to call it "competition."

No comments: