Opinion: Is government control of our internet a good idea?

As Utahns, it’s our obligation to consider the proper role of government. With that in mind, one of my goals is to start an important conversation about whether government control of our internet, with taxpayers assuming the risk and footing the bill, is within that proper role. In Utah, we are seeing a push for local governments to control our internet infrastructure — something that even the bluest states could only dream of.

I was elected to the Utah House of Representatives for eight terms. I served as the speaker of the House for two of those terms. Serving in public office put me in front of everyday Utahns in hundreds of legislative hearings, town hall meetings and campaign events across all 29 counties in Utah. I learned a lot.

Never once, in over 20 years in the public square, did I meet a single Utahn who asked or demanded that any government, from the state down to the city level, take control of internet infrastructure.

Free markets give us our best chance at addressing consumer demand and service. We know this. The call to reject government-funded and controlled internet is not just a philosophical argument. Examples of failed government-controlled supply chains can be found in nations around the world, along with specific examples in the United States and even here in Utah.

The now-defunct iProvo sold its obsolete system to a free-market internet fiber company for $1. That’s $38,999,999 less than the Provo City taxpayers paid for it. Then there’s the staggering debt of UTOPIA, a union of cities pushing for greater government control of the market, that is running on big promises and borrowed time.

In defending UTOPIA in the Utah News Dispatch, UTOPIA’s CEO, Roger Timmerman, noted that there are about 450 community-owned networks across the country and 50 went online last year. What he failed to mention is that taxpayers are typically left footing the bill for these networks, and millions of dollars are lost in the process. Data from the University of Pennsylvania show that 87% of these projects have insufficient cash flow to achieve long-run solvency.

The message that taxpayers need to send to city leaders is that government prospecting into the internet business, especially where multiple providers already exist and compete, ultimately hurts the very citizens they are elected to serve.

Cities have a conflict of interest when they finance and structure public debt for broadband infrastructure. Their success hinges on either attracting ever more subscribers or having all of the city’s taxpayers foot the bill. At the same time, cities have authority to grant permits and levy fees for the private sector to develop or upgrade internet infrastructure. Cities that get into the internet business put themselves in competition with the private sector and imperil city finances. National studies have revealed the chilling effect — cities that pursue government-run broadband deter private-sector investment in those cities.

There are examples of Utah city leaders who understand their proper role. For example, the city I live in, Draper, rejected a proposal to enter the internet business with taxpayers guaranteeing the debt to do it. Draper and its elected leaders wisely prioritize roads, public safety, land-use decisions, parks and recreation … legitimate city government functions. What happened after the city of Draper made it clear it was not becoming an internet company? A brand-new private-sector fiber company arrived and used its own capital to put new fiber infrastructure throughout the city. In Draper, private-sector internet providers continue to see real competition. The bar has been raised, and everyone is benefiting from the arrival of a new provider. The best part? There’s no government subsidy required. Last year, these private-sector companies invested a combined $100 billion in deployment of internet infrastructure — from cable and fiber to satellites and 10G. What happens when the government provider inevitably fails to modernize and keep pace with changes in technology? iProvo has already lived through that scenario, and it’s only a matter of time before other government-owned networks meet the same fate. Our education campaign at www.nogovinternet.com has received a great response, which I expected. Let us all resolve to be fully informed about the existence and consequences of government-controlled internet. Good information drives good decisions.

Greg Hughes is a former speaker of the Utah House and leads the NoGovInternet.com campaign in Utah.