There were two state representatives by the name of Billy Tauzin and John Dingell who were at the forefront of a very heated debate. Both were firmly convinced by the Bells that if broadband were to be deployed rapidly and on an even playing field with cable providers, then the Bells should no longer be forced to open up their networks to competitors for broadband service. Hence, they submitted a bill (The Tauzin-Dingell Bill) some time ago that was barely taken seriously at first, however with the Bells and a few key politicians behind it, this bill actually made it through the House of Representatives and moved forward to the Senate.
In no uncertain terms, if this bill had passed, it would have without question wiped out any ISP that offered DSL service. Neither side argued that point; so the question became, was is it fair?
Thankfully the bill was ultimately defeated, however it was a great demonstration of how corporate money intermingled in politics can make almost anything possible. An MIT associate did an in-depth examination of what that bill would have meant for all of us and you can find it here.
From their inception to the current landscape, you now know an almost 20 year Bell history encapsulated in about 15 minutes of reading.
What will become of the never-deployed ISDN network? The lack of local competition? The future of ISPs? Time will tell.
I have done my utmost to keep this report as free from my own views and feelings as possible, however if you have an interest in seeing where I stand, you can click onto the above link which will take you to my “Public Statement” that I have posted on this site.
If you have questions regarding the veracity of any of the information presented in this report, or you would like a more complete answer, feel free to contact me.