Seriously, though: saying that there’s a fork with only two branches is creating a false dichotomy. There are, in fact, an INFINITE number of possible tacks and tradeoffs to take.

While Free Press’ agenda is extreme, so too is the notion that facilities-based competition is the only answer. Many existing facilities were built with subsidies (such as USF) and/or monopoly rents and are infeasible to duplicate under the conditions of a competitive market. What’s more, they’re economically inefficient because they’re needlessly duplicative; the existing facilities will do just fine.

Free markets can solve many if not most problems if they are really free, open, and competitive. But where there is no competition, we must either create competition or — if that’s not feasible — regulate with as light a touch as possible. The “special access” market, which is currently broken, is a good example of such a case.