The following is an excerpt from The Innovator Versus the Collective
If we want continued innovation and progress, we must remove the barriers and prohibitions on competition. We must repeal the regulations and controls that restrict innovators and producers. This means allowing innovators and businesses to use their property as they judge best. This is precisely what regulations prevent.
One of the challenges to establishing a competitive market in industries under the sway of natural monopoly theory, such as electricity and cable, is the issue of right-of-way. Most streets, utility easements, and utility poles are owned or controlled by government or existing utility companies. As we have seen in regard to cable and Internet service, access to a right-of-way can be a barrier to new companies entering a market.
Utility easements are usually a part of a property deed and allow utility companies access to and use of a parcel of land on the edge of the property. The exact terms and conditions can vary from subdivision to subdivision and state to state. Consequently, policies regarding the use of easements by new market entrants would need to consider these variations. However, in general, easement provisions provide use of and access to all utility companies. Where this is the case, new utility companies (I include cable and Internet service providers, as well as any future industries that might require similar infrastructure) could be granted access to the easement to install poles, run wires, and install other infrastructure. But these new companies could not interfere with the poles, wires, and infrastructure owned by other utilities. In some cases, it is conceivable that existing utilities may sell or lease use of their poles or other infrastructure as a revenue source. Indeed, this is already the case in many areas, though regulations often force utility pole owners to give access to other companies.
Where a right-of-way is a part of “public property,” such as streets, utility companies should be granted access to install the needed infrastructure, so long as they return the right-of-way to its previous condition. The municipality should impose no other conditions or costs on the utility. For example, if a company needs to dig up a road to run cables, it should restore the road to its previous condition when construction is completed.
The above suggestions are not intended to represent the only solutions, but only to indicate how a solution can respect the rights of all individuals and businesses involved. New entrants would have access to a right-of-way without violating anyone’s rights, and could therefore install infrastructure without the arbitrary and needless expenses often imposed by local governments.
Of course, a respect for property rights means that all utility regulatory commissions should be abolished. All regulations and legislation that allows government to award franchises or otherwise determine who can enter a market should be repealed. The result will be a truly competitive marketplace, and with it, the innovation and progress that freedom makes possible. To properly refute natural monopoly theory we must defend property rights.