F.C.C. to Freedom of Contract: “Nuh-uh.”

The New York Times reports this morning that the FCC has taken a look at exclusive contracts between cable companies and apartment complexes and said, roughly, fuhgetaboutit.

Kevin Martin, tireless advocate of government management of the telecom sector, argues that the idea is to spur competition between providers.  It’s true, folks. No day in Washington would be complete without some bureaucrat trying to dress up government intrusion in the marketplace as some sort of market-oriented, pro-competition measure.

Apparently, the idea is to push down prices by butting in and forcing apartment complexes to allow multiple cable companies to operate on their premises, whether the apartment companies want to or not.  But since when has government action really succeeded in bringing prices down in an effective manner?  It’s going to be more time consuming and more expensive for apartment companies to have to set up the infrastructure and contractual arrangements to work with multiple companies, so even if cable prices themselves drop, it’s entirely plausible that apartment rental prices will rise faster than they would have and make up the difference.

But what’s this really about?  Federal control over the market. Don’t believe me? Here’s a quote from the NYT article from Gene Kimmelman, vice president for federal affairs at the Consumers Union and an advocate of the policy:

“Most people in apartment buildings have been subject to a monopoly provider, with little or no local control and no federal control over pricing. This is the most significant step regulators can take short of regulating prices.”

See that? "Federal control over pricing." That’s what this is about.

Either way, this is a gross violation of freedom of contract.  If there were really a market for this sort of thing, if people cared enough to make it worthwhile, apartment complexes would’ve started allowing multiple cable providers to operate on site and would be advertising that as a selling point to compete against other complexes.

But I suppose this is exactly what we should expect from an agency that spends in excess of $300 million a year in order in order to sit around trying to figure out how much Americans ought to be paying for their cable bills. Ladies and gentlemen, your tax dollars at work.