NASUCA Scores Carriers on Half Truths in Preemption Fight
NASUCA accused carriers of distortion amid intensifying conflict over whether the FCC should preempt states on carrier billing issues, including tougher consumer measures. Besides being an FCC issue, the matter stars in a case at the 11th U.S. Appeals Court, Atlanta.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
“Carriers’ comments… consist of broad generalizations rather than compelling examples of specific state laws, unaccompanied by any quantification of the extent of the burden imposed or the difficulty complying with both the state’s laws and the Commission’s truth-in-billing rules and principles,” a recent NASUCA filing said. The filing reported on a meeting NASUCA had with officials at the FCC.
Carriers have “widely circulated horror stories” of being forced to bow to requirements on bill appearance, with states dictating typeface, font size and other details, but wireless carriers have never shown such rules exist, NASUCA said.
Patrick Pearlman, deputy consumer advocate for the W. Va. PSC, told us the FCC seems divided on preemption. “The real fight… is exactly what you'd expect,” he said. “States and the consumer advocates are pushing for heightened protections and no preemption. The industry is pushing for no further protections and preemption.” The sides are “as diametrically opposed as you can imagine,” Pearlman said.
CTIA declined comment on NASUCA’s new charges. Following a recent meeting with Comr. Tate, CTIA said it made the point that the wireless industry is “facing an environment that will negatively impact consumers -- differing regulation in each state.”
NASUCA wants the 11th Circuit to bar FCC preemption of state commissions’ power to mandate or prohibit line items on wireless carrier bills. The case has several levels. NASUCA said the FCC proposal to preempt doesn’t proceed logically from a petition NASUCA filed seeking a declaratory ruling on the reasonableness of carrier billing practices. The FCC broke federal rules by not allowing comment before tentatively concluding in favor of preemption and is interfering illegally with state taxing authority, NASUCA said.
“The FCC’s response to NASUCA’s petition was, to say the least, unexpected,” NASUCA said in a court pleading. “Rather than limiting the growth of line item charges, the FCC gave a ‘green light’ to their continuing proliferation. Worse, the FCC undermined state authority to deal with such billing practices, even where the state laws were central to their sovereign powers.”
State bans on or mandates of CMRS carriers using separate line items to recover specific costs “clearly and directly affect the rates and rate structures” for wireless service, the FCC said. State-by-state controls could stitch “a varying patchwork of state line item requirements and prohibitions, which would ‘undermine the benefits derived from allowing CMRS carriers the flexibility to design national or regional rate plans,'” the FCC said. In a filing, CTIA said: “The FCC correctly, and at the very least reasonably, determined that state laws that either prohibit or mandate line item charges have a direct effect on rate elements, rate structures, and rates.”
No date has been set for oral arguments in the 11th Circuit case.