Save Access

from: Orlando Sentinel

Veto in order
Our position: The measure to increase competition in the cable TV market is flawed.

Posted May 17, 2007

The best thing you can say about the push to increase competition in the cable-television market in Florida is that the folks who came up with the title "Consumer Choice Act of 2007" have a sense of humor.

How else can you explain that most consumer advocates oppose the bill lawmakers passed last session, and many of the state's largest cable-television providers now support it? The bill takes control away from local governments and sends it to Tallahassee in a move that could mean public-access channels get booted off TV altogether.

Gov. Charlie Crist ought to veto this bill and send it back to lawmakers for an overhaul next year.

The idea of increasing competition in the cable-television industry by allowing easier access by telephone companies entering the business isn't bad. More competition could lead to lower costs. But this bill requires cities and counties to surrender their power to regulate these businesses. Consumers lose a local advocate to resolve disputes.

Even worse, public-access channels would be severely restricted and local governments would have to find some way to pay for televising their meetings. Currently this public-affairs programming is paid for by cable subscribers, but after 2012 the companies wouldn't be required to provide government access.

That's reason enough for Mr. Crist to veto this idea. Lawmakers ought to come back next year with a bill that requires companies to televise public meetings and provides consumers a local office to handle complaints.