User:Morenoddestiny/sandbox

Competition
A lack of competition and choice in the broadband provider market has been attributed to past stringent regulation from federal, state, and local levels. Specifically, such criticism has referenced the limitations regarding access to and development of the physical infrastructure neccessary to broadband, including right-of-way to land and ownership of utility poles. The Rural Broadband Association, an organization representing rural-centric providers, has pointed to the expensive permits and procedural delays in preventing "universal" broadband access. For rural areas such as the ones the RBA represents, financial returns can be insufficient and thus private actors have little incentive to compete over another in establishing relevant facilities. This problem is particularly salient for indigenous parts of the U.S, where tribal lands "have some of the lowest internet access rates of any demographic". Policy goals of equity, not profit, have been driving the few access projects targeted towards these communities as a result of unrewarding demand. In other circumstances, where demand is high enough to propel investment, the fixed costs associated with building broadband infrastructure are high enough to deter even the larger providers. Sprint claims it spent "tens of millions of dollars" in their checking for compliance with NEPA, a set of environmental impact regulations, that found "no significant impact" by the conclusion and ultimately delayed their entrance in that particular geography.

To remedy this anti-competitive climate, governments have worked to minimize costs entrants may incur. The Telecommunicatons Act of 1996 expanded access rights to pole attachments for ISPs with federal subsidies in an aim to encourage provider participation. In 2015, the Federal Communications Commission granted a preemption petition requested by local utility boards in North Carolina and Tennessee over the state laws that, as a result of private provider lobbying, had legally prevented municipalities from entering the broadband market.

A number of counties have also issued ordinances or grants that waive or offset certain fees associated with building infrastructure in order to encourage broadband building projects. To further reduce costs and expand the market, the FCC has also approved a "Dig Once" policy-- a mandate that requires cities to implement broadband conduits during construction of federally-funded roads. Because the financial price of laying down fiber constitutes such a large portion of deployment costs, measures sympathetic towards this step of entrance make it easier for more actors to invest.

Outside of regulatory and legislative action, states have at their disposal informal policies that offer other incentives for investment, such as collecting and providing local data to streamline deployment action or communication efforts.