Wed.’s House Telecom Subcommittee hearing on VoIP focused mostly ...

reintroduce VoIP legislation. The bill will resemble legislation he introduced last year to preempt state regulation of VoIP, an issue apparently resolved by the FCC’s ruling in the Vonage petition. But Pickering said it was also “critical” to address intercarrier compensation in VoIP legislation. His bill would set a deadline for the FCC to finish reviewing intercarrier compensation regulations. Pickering suggested a deadline, and all witness at the hearing agreed. But Mark Shlanta, CEO of S.D. Network Communications, said the review period should be 12-18 months instead of the 180 days Pickering proposed. Pickering deemed a compromise of 9 months acceptable. House Commerce Committee Chmn. Barton (R-Tex.) asked the witnesses if they would support reducing or eliminating USF. “Reform it, don’t repeal it,” Carl Grivner, CEO of XO Communications, said of USF. Grivner said it should apply equally to all carriers, including cable VoIP providers. Barton asked if anyone on the panel would vote to repeal USF. When none replied, Barton said: “Now that we've determined that you're for USF, are you willing to pay into it?” Thomas Rutledge, COO of Cablevision Systems and representing NCTA, said cable is willing to support USF. However, he said an updated definition of USF is needed to clarify exactly what services USF funds could underwrite. House Telecom Subcommittee Chmn. Upton (R-Mich.) asked the witnesses if USF should be financed with a flat fee for each phone line. Most said no. Paul Erickson, SunRocket chmn., said assessing USF as a percentage of revenue would be the easiest. CenturyTel Pres. and COO Karen Puckett and Grivner said they would support a revenue percentage formula. Barton said he thought VoIP was a poor acronym for Internet phone service and suggested his own: BITS, for Broadband Internet telephone service. He said it was “food for thought” and he would consider other acronyms.