Sen. Franken: AT&T/T-Mobile merger an "unreasonable risk to the economy"

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/07/senator-attt-mobile-merger-an-unreasonable-risk-to-the-economy.ars

The United States Senator who fiercely opposed Comcast's acquisition of NBC Universal is back in the trenches again, this time inveighing against AT&T's proposed buyout of T-Mobile USA.

"Americans gather their information about the world, purchase products and services, work, and communicate largely through the wired and wireless information infrastructure," Senator Al Franken's (D-MN) 24-page letter to the Federal Communications Commission and Department of Justice contends.

"Allowing two companies to control which websites and applications are available to consumers and what content will stream at a faster speed would be very risky. We should not let an effective duopoly dictate the rules of the road for wireless networks, and I fear that will happen if this merger is approved."

The FCC and DoJ have been entrusted with considering the proposed $39 billion union. Franken pretty much throws the book at the idea. His letter disputes AT&T arguments that the telco needs T-Mobile's network resources to roll out 4G broadband to most of the country. And he suggests that the marriage would stifle innovation, cause job losses, raise retail prices, and undermine the prospects for effective net neutrality rules.



Sen. Franken's page
http://blog.alfranken.com/2011/07/27/ars-technica-senator-attt-mobile-merger-an-unreasonable-risk-to-the-economy/

I'm not saying that the merger is a good thing. I don't think it is. On the other hand, if Franken is going to claim that it poses an "unreasonable risk" to the economy he better be able to explain the nature of that risk more convincingly. A lot of people remember when there was only one type of phone service (landline) and one provider (Ma Bell). The economy seemed to be largely unaffected by that fact. It had periods of growth and periods of slow down. Today, voice service is available via landline from multiple providers in large portions of the country, through VoIP providers and also is available by wireless service from multiple providers (and still will be after the merger). The impact of the merger in creating a duopoly in the backhaul market and other areas -- and the risk of an adverse impact on smaller wireless providers who will have fewer competitive choice is troubling. But just saying "big is bad" isn't going to cut it.

maybe all it says is "big is bad", but I doubt it. Have you read it?

But my point, which I probably could have made more clearly, is that it doesn't help move the ball forward, imo, to claim that the deal poses a risk to the entire economy. It poses a lot of risks to competition, which are bad, but that's not the same as saying that the economy itself will be significantly harmed.

The monopolists and oligopolists are free to do whatever they want to consolidate their power and rape the american consumer. I love Franken, but he's tilting at a windmill here.

I doubt anyone under 30 even knows that constant Anti-trust actions was once a focus of government in administrations of BOTH party's.

Thanks for the thread, cal.