Horner, Dayton, Emmer on state’s broadband role

Why hasn't high-speed access to the Internet been more visible in the Minnesota governor's race?

A lot of people think it's the public infrastructure issue of the 21st Century. Economic development authorities, especially outstate, will tell you their communities will die on the vine without it. The federal government is putting a couple hundred million dollars into it in Minnesota as we speak. You can get into some heated arguments around the state about the marketplace, competition and community action for the public good.

Seems like a ready-made issue for serious policy discussion. In July, a Star Tribune editorial called for high-level campaign debate on the topic. After the Blandin Foundation's forum on broadband in Brainerd last week, I asked Jack Geller, U of M Crookston professor and long-time follower of the issue, why that didn't happen.

First he made the obvious point that in a race dominated by how to make the state's financial ends meet, it's tough for anybody to talk about new investments. But he also noted that not very many in the press have asked the candidates about it.

So I did, and here's what I got.

To be fair to Independence Party candidate Tom Horner, he has raised the issue in community conversations and debates, calling good access a key economic development driver. And he has the most nuanced position of the three candidates.

Deploying adequate infrastructure is mostly a matter for the private sector, he says, but he thinks there are places -- like Monticello, where the city created a municipal-owned network -- suited for a public-private collaboration. Horner is the only candidate to say also that there are remote places where the state should put money directly into projects to build infrastructure when it's not feasible for private companies.

He said he wants to clarify whether the state constitution allows state bonding to do that.

Some people who have fought for municipal fiber networks have been critical of a 1910 state law requiring communities to vote by 65 percent or more before a city can establish its own phone company. It's impractical and outdated and mainly a protection for existing phone companies, these critics say. Horner doesn't agree. He says the bar should be high for a city to get into the telecommunications business.

DFLer Mark Dayton also said it is crucial for Minnesota to have "border-to-border" high-speed Internet access so people can live and work anywhere in the state with access to the best technology. As for specifics on how to get there, he said he would consult with experts once he's elected to determine the most cost-effective strategy.

Dayton's website does commit him to changing state law that would make it easier for local governments to develop their own broadband infrastructure. I have a question in to his campaign to clarify whether that's a specific reference to the 65-percent majority requirement.

Republican Tom Emmer notes that broadband access to the Internet has increased rapidly in the past decade, calling widespread adoption one of the 21st Century's great business success stories.

The role of government, he says, is to encourage and provide incentives for providers to expand into areas of the state that need better service. He thinks government regulations need to be streamlined to let providers expand efficiently.

As with Dayton, I have a question in to the Emmer campaign about the 65-percent municipal threshhold.

None of the candidates mentioned the role of the task force appointed this summer by the commerce commissioner to monitor the state's progress toward high-speed goals the Legislature approved in the spring. That task force has met a couple of times and could become an interesting player for any new governor looking to take broadband seriously.

• Annandale watches special session for broadband help
• DNR pushes ahead with its groundwater planning
• Broadband providers seek $44 million from state fund