I'm with you on rent control, but states banning municipalities from owning their own broadband networks is at least as myopic. Thea rgument is that publicly owned utilities crowd out competition, but we have abundant evidence for the argument that (unlike typical residential rent markets) utility markets are dominated by oligopolies who are easily able to engage in anti-competitive behaviors without having to form a cartel. Sure, in theory Comcast and AT&T might offer such competitive discounts/service upgrades that they cross some threshold and trigger an all-out price war that would be good for consumers, but I'd put the odds on that actually happening at close to zero.
Now I'm not such a big fan of municipal legislation - as a European, I think American democracy may be too decentralized and exacerbate the public choice problem, but I don't see a clear organizing principle that will only prevent economically bad legislation while allowing economically good legislation. The proposals to ban municipal or county internet services in North Carolina are just as mypopic as rent control laws in many Californian cities.
> Now I'm not such a big fan of municipal legislation - as a European, I think American democracy may be too decentralized and exacerbate the public choice problem, but I don't see a clear organizing principle that will only prevent economically bad legislation while allowing economically good legislation.
Operating utilities (especially last mile internet) at the municipal level makes much better sense than federalizing it. The transit market is sufficiently competitive that there is no need for the last mile operator to own a national network. Meanwhile with a national network operator, if the service is unusually terrible in a specific city there is nothing that city's residents can do about it because even when they're all in agreement they don't have enough votes to move the needle at the federal level.
And then you can have laboratories of democracy: If one city funds their network entirely through subscription fees and another funds it entirely through property taxes then maybe we discover that one works much better and other cities can start doing that.
Now I'm not such a big fan of municipal legislation - as a European, I think American democracy may be too decentralized and exacerbate the public choice problem, but I don't see a clear organizing principle that will only prevent economically bad legislation while allowing economically good legislation. The proposals to ban municipal or county internet services in North Carolina are just as mypopic as rent control laws in many Californian cities.