If there’s a “motherhood and apple pie” issue on the July 14 primary election ballot, it has to be Question 1, allocating $15 million toward extending Maine’s “broadband,” or high-speed Internet, further into rural communities.

That sum is expected to “leverage,” as they say, another $30 million for a “down payment” on a tab that would require $600 million to connect all 83,000 households that now lack such service.

Especially amid coronavirus, Question 1 is undoubtedly a Good Thing, endorsed by a near-unanimous chorus, ranging from economic development and business groups to the Maine Farmland Trust and League of Women Voters.

The case appears so overwhelming that it seems fair to ask, how could anyone object? As it turns out, there are a few reasons.

One is the matter of competing priorities, as suggested by the other bond on the ballot, Question 2, providing $105 million for transportation, which – if you thought it was on the ballot every year – you’d be right: It has been, since 2015.

One commentator helpfully ventured that, though ConnectMaine recommends spending $40 million a year in public funds for the next five years, that’s still far less than the annual $100 million plugged into the Department of Transportation.

Advertisement

Trouble is, the bonds are in no way comparable. Broadband represents new investment in parts of the state where private providers haven’t found it pays to extend service.

The DOT bailout represents less than half the annual gap between what fuel taxes bring in and what it would take to keep the roads we all drive on from crumbling further, a problem only made worse by reduced driving during the pandemic.

The broadband dilemma is one familiar to those building public services throughout our history: Laying pipelines, extending electricity, and now connecting Internet is far less expensive in densely populated areas than rural regions. The “last mile” to serve far-flung areas costs the most.

We once dealt with this problem by pooling costs. We extended postal service, telephone and electric service across the country, with comparable rates for all customers, and helped create a more democratic and equitable system in the bargain.

The states awarded franchise areas for public utilities, regulated rates and service, and imposed taxes, while the federal government delivered the mail and generously supported publicly owned infrastructure.

That’s not how we developed Internet and cellular telephone service. These now-booming industries are governed by the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, which opened the field

Advertisement

to new entrants – but also forbade states from regulating the new entities, something usually appearing only in footnotes to descriptions of the law.

The theory, such as it was, what that these fledgling industries would be crippled by the heavy hand of government regulation and taxation.

That was then. Now, more than half of American households use cell phones exclusively, while only 5% depend solely on what we now call land lines. Cellular service is immensely profitable, yet customers still have no say over what they pay, or the service provided them – and in Maine, broadband is usually available only through cable or telephone lines.

That doesn’t seem right. The $15 million “down payment” will go almost entirely to private companies to build, then own, lines at taxpayer expense. Using ConnectMaine’s figures, it will cost an eye-popping $7,228 per customer just to offer broadband throughout Maine – not counting whatever you’ll pay to get that service.

By contrast, while the road problem in Maine – like almost every other sparsely populated state – may seem daunting, it’s primarily because no one seems to want to take action. A 7 cent per gallon tax increase would raise $50 million per year, yet cost the average driver not much more than $100.

In a nutshell, the two bonds contrast two competing economic systems: One that uses government to plan and direct the development of public services, and one that trusts the private sector to try to provide every public good.

Advertisement

Starting with the Carter administration, and accelerating in the Reagan years and beyond, the mantra was that private business could always spend money – including tax money – better and more efficiently than any government entity.

The results have run the gamut, from our monstrously disorganized health care system to such absurdities as former Gov. Paul LePage’s “privatization” for operating the Casco Bay Bridge, one of Maine’s busiest spans – a move that saved no money but did sack state employees.

In 2020, amid the meltdown of public health and a virus spreading everywhere except the Northeast, the “privatization” argument is far from persuasive. I, for one, will be voting against Question 1.

Douglas Rooks, a Maine editor, reporter, opinion writer and author for 35 years, has published books about George Mitchell, and the Maine Democratic Party. He welcomes comment at drooks@tds.net

Comments are not available on this story.

filed under: