[dominotw]

>the federal government would have authority to override those laws.

Yea i guess thats more of an example of inaction. I was looking for a specific regulation that helps telecom companies.

[rectang]

That's exactly the problem: selective actions favoring the monopolists are pursued aggressively (e.g. demolition of Net Neutrality), while actions which might actually harm monopolists are deferred indefinitely. Thus the effect of supposed "deregulation" is to deliver the market to the monopolists.

[dominotw]

Yes but I was referring to comment saying there are current regulations that helps telecom monopolies that govt needs to destroy but it isn't. I was wondering what those regulations are that need to be destroyed.

[smichel17]

I'm confused. Isn't that exactly what this is?

> current regulations that helps telecom monopolies that govt needs to destroy but it isn't

There are regulations at the state level. The federal government has the authority to stop these regulations. Yet they don't.

Whether the bad regulation was implemented by state or federal government seems rather inconsequential.

[TheCoelacanth]

State laws that outlaw the creation of municipal ISPs.