Even without this, it's still dirty politics when a piece of legislation that will benefit one industry (cable) is pushed by a senator whose son both works for a company in that industry (Comcast) and is part of the lobbying association for that industry (TCTA). I don't think he's with the TCTA anymore, but it sounds as if he moved to the same job, only in Comcast.

Having worked with both son and father on issues relating to the communications industry versus government intervention into the same industry, I will stand with father and son 90% of the time. It is true that Curtis Person Jr.'s position with Charter Communications (a privately owned company) and Comcast and his strong relationship with his father may have provided him an edge in securing him a position in the hearts and minds of the Senators of the state of Tennessee. It is still those same Senators that vote on the issues before them. Let's hope they are smart enough to understand the difference.

In this state, as in a great many states, the next great battle will be the ownership of communications and local governments see this as a means to money and power. The same local governments will put taxpayer dollars to work in order to build and protect a different kind of monopoly. Thru the years, Curtis Person Sr. has protected the interests of private companies over the interests of governments seeking new revenues thru legislation. Which do you think is the greater evil, private ownership of communication systems or governmental controlled and owned communication systems?

Bill,

You'll recall this isn't the first time that you (and I) have pointed out the absurdity of this clearly improper conflict of interest between the Persons father and son.

Back with the initial push on the SuperDCMA legislation, we pointed out this same "ethical dilemma" (I use that loosely).

More business as usual at the state house, it seems. The only way to stop these abuses is to remove our current legislators, and replace them with people who are committed to above board, honest representation.

I'm sick and tired of them all. Thanks for the good work at keeping the heat on, Bill.

Frank, you are probably not aware of the legislation that we're talking about here, a bill known as the superdmca bill. It was written for the cable companies by a Hollywood lawyer, with the same legislation being pushed in many states simultaneously. It did *nothing* for the people of the state; the entertainment industries aren't interested in that. Instead, it granted vast new powers to the cable companies to be able to approve or disapprove any piece of equipment that you might hook to your cable or cable-internet connections.

Remember when AT&T was "The Phone Company" and you had to rent the big clunky phone for $5/month? Notice that you can now *buy* a better phone for $5? Comcast et al wanted us to return to the old days of telephones, only with cable. The sdmca also criminalized connecting unauthorized equipment, not just a civil action. This means they could outlaw (note: outlaw) your tivo, vcr, computer, whatever they wanted to.

This was obviously a bill designed to benefit the cable industry, not "the people". It's ludicrous to claim there's no connection when Sr. is pushing a piece of legislation written for the cable industry (and benefiting only the cable industry at the expense of the citizens of the state) when Jr. works for a cable company and is a member of their lobbying association.

I don't think you get this point: he didn't just "support" this piece of filth, he sponsored the senate version.

As for your "greater evil" question: clearly gov't owned media is worse. It's not related to what we're talking about, though.

Michael, I understand completely, and that's why the 90% factor is thrown in.

You must understand that while Person may endorse or write sweetheart deals for the cable industry (for which I oppose as well), he is at the same time opposing laws from being enacted that force through tax dollars the establishment of city owned or controlled communications companies.

The people can chose not to purchase the services a particular cable company may offer and opt for satellite as our gracious host to this site has or put up one heck of an antenna. But the power of government to remove from your wallet and your children’s wallet revenue for control of an industry is insidious.

And that, though you may not see it, is the issue. While we concentrate on Curtis Person Sr.’s antics with legislation, which you are correct in saying they not always above board, the worms are eating away at the floor boards, and as usual the public ignores it. Because you can take away my life, my money, my freedom, but God help the politician that takes away Sunday football.

Person, Sr. didn't begin his Jr. related conflicts with Jr's current job.

When Jr. worked for Charter, a bill by Sen Southerland and Rep Litz to allow municipal cables to expand outside thier utility lines was fought hard by both Charter and the cable lobby. Person, Jr. was not up to the task, so Sr. worked HARD to defeat the bill.

In an unusual turn, the people won over corporate influance for once. the Litz/Southerland bill passed both Houses and is law today.

The bill you speak of is an attempt to make up with the cable industry.

In any case, I learned a lot about Curtis Person Sr and Jr during those days. Of course, Jr. is just doing his job, but Sr. went so far over the line it borders on criminal. Without question, he broke Senate rules, but more importantly, he betryed those he is elected to represent.