"Network Neutrality" vs Bandwidth Rationing

In todays issue of Good Morning Silicon Valley, John Paczkowski comments on Andy Kesslers proposal in The Weekly Standard that the only solution to the telecoms proposals to eliminate "network neutrality" in favor of price-based bandwidth rationing is to use the Kelo v New London ruling of the SCOTUS (of which you all know I've been involved in a little action on myself) to eminent domain the telecom networks.

Kessler's rationale is that the telecoms have not made any effort since the backbone glut of the late 90's (Enron/Worldcom/GlobalCrossing, etc) to expand consumers bandwidth, particularly the "last mile" of fiber optic to consumers doorsteps, therefore the networks could be construed by a creative silicon valley lawyer to be "blighted" from telecom neglect.

As I comment on GMSV's blog entry in response to JP's piece, the problem is not telecom neglect, the problem is government regulation. Here's what I inform the readers of GMSV of:

As I'm one of the guys who had the idea of using eminent domain against Justices Souter and Breyer, I've got a pretty good idea of what is and is not eminent domain, and as a person who has written on the real reason for things like the Enron/GlobalCrossing/Worldcom collapses and the failure to go "the last mile" on fiberoptic lines, I can say why Kessler is wrong here too.
The reason the networks have been ignored for years is because of the Telecommunications Reform Act of 1998, which, rather than encouraging the telecoms to build "the last mile" of fiberoptic, was amended by democrats to require that telecoms that did build last mile access must provide their competitors with access to their customers at a price below the cost of access.
Given this financially untenable requirement, the telecoms told congress to stick it, and have done nothing about last mile fiber optic since.
The current fight over network neutrality is the result of a scarcity of high bandwidth, due to TRA 98, that is resulting in proposed price-based bandwidth rationing.
Until the diseconomic strictures of the TRA are rescinded, this is an economic inevitability, and calls for eminent domain are simply the end game of a socialist plot hatched back in 1998 to nationalize the network.
Current network "blight" is the fault of the governments regulations, not telecom neglect.