I want to say for the record that I am completely undecided when it comes to a candidate for Governor. My goal is to highlight every time I see broadband mentioned in a Minnesota context – so whenever I see a candidate, any candidate, mention broadband I’ll highlight it. If your favorite candidate mentions it and I miss it, please send the mention my way. If I’m not mentioning your favorite candidate maybe you need to convince him or her to think and talk about broadband more.
Today I noticed that candidate Paul Thissen mentioned broadband in a student video chat. Here’s what he said:
WILL YOU ACCEPT FEDERAL STIMULUS MONEY AND WHAT WILL YOU USE IT FOR?
Yes, and most of it will already be directed at particular things. We can use it to help with health and human services, invest in roads, bridges, transit, and rail, and for our communications infrastructure, where we’re well-positioned to do things like get broadband throughout the state. We’ll also be able to use some for energy efficiency and conservation, and in education. To the extent that we have discretion in how to spend it, the main thing on my mind will be getting people back to work in a way that’s win-win, for them and for Minnesota.
Thanks to Ann Higgins for some historical perspective…
During the 2005-2006 legislative session, Representative Thissen served on the House Regulated Industries Committee (prior to the formation of the House Telecom Division) and supported legislation ( HF 1319, introduced in 2005 by Representative Beard; companion to SF 688, authored by Senator Kelley) to jump-start more competition for the offering of cable TV service by telecommunications service providers, particularly in the metro area, by increasing the flexibility of the state law (Ch. 238) providing for local cable franchise authority, to make it more likely that cities would be able to grant competitive franchises. This was also viewed at the time as the auspices of gaining more traction for higher broadband speeds, particularly in the metro area where few, if any, competitive franchises had (or have been) successfully granted and implemented despite several early indications of interest by providers such as Wide Open West and Everest in such franchises during the mid-‘90’s.
The legislation had traction in the State Senate, but failed to get sufficient support in the House committee due to strong opposition by the cable industry, so the proposal was withdrawn from further consideration.
Also during that same session (2005) , Senator Kelley and Rep. Beard introduced companion bills (HF 1710/SF 1225) calling for a state broadband revolving loan fund to help spur deployment of broadband services throughout the state, though the proposed authorization for state bonding to provide a revenue source for loans for public/private ventures for projects providing 100 MB-1 GB speeds was not finalized). The legislation was heard and recommended to pass in the senate policy committee and referred to Senate Finance, but the bill did not progress to the Senate floor.