FCC Gets Advice About Regulating Lifeline, Link-Up Programs
The FCC should raise the income ceiling for LifeLine and Link-Up program eligibility so the programs are in line with a similar one subsidizing heating costs, the Iowa Utilities Board said in comments filed late Friday. The FCC voted in 2004 to raise the Lifeline and Link-Up eligibility ceiling to 135 percent of federal poverty guidelines, seeking comments on whether to raise it to 150 percent. The agency recently asked for comments to “refresh” that issue, which had lain dormant.
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!
The Iowa board said a 150 percent cap would treat “all low-income consumers in an equitable manner.” Iowans eligible for the Low Income Heating Assistance Program already have “an income-based standard of 150 percent as an eligibility criterion,” it said. Those eligible for LIHEAP “comprise the majority of the subscribers of the Lifeline/Link-Up program,” the board said.
Lifeline and Link-UP participation is less than it should be, due to the low income cutoff, said the National Consumer Law Center. “Broadening the income eligibility from 135% to 150% of poverty would reach more struggling low- income families,” the center said. LIHEAP “recognizes that households at 150% of poverty are very much low-income households in need of assistance and allows states to set income eligibility at or below the greater of 150% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines or 60 percent of states’ median income,” the center said.
USTelecom sees “no evidence that increasing the Lifeline eligibility requirements would materially improve low-income consumers’ access to telecommunications services,” it said. The extra cost could “further strain” the Universal Service Fund as “the USF is already experiencing an unsustainable rate of growth.” Embarq said its experience shows that “raising the eligibility criterion has little impact on low- income subscriptions.” Better results come from “cooperative efforts involving carriers and state agencies” working to encourage Lifeline use, Embarq said.
Similar disagreement arose on another issue that the FCC wanted to “refresh": Whether it should set rules governing how carriers promote the Lifeline program. “The regulation is unnecessary,” said the National Telecommunications Cooperative Association. “Carriers have a strong financial incentive” to advertise Lifeline and Link-Up, NTCA said. “Advertising helps ensure that customers stay connected, which in turn ensures that the companies retain the revenue sources associated with those customers.” But “the carriers, not the Commission, are in the best position to determine how to get the Lifeline/Linkup message across,” the group said. “Carriers, especially those serving rural areas, know the communities and how to reach them.” According to Qwest, “outreach for these government-created programs will be most effective when it is done through the public agencies that already have contacts with the consumers who are eligible for these programs.”
Not so, said the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates. Setting “minimum outreach requirements” for carriers “would go a long way to ensuring that all [carriers] are pulling their own weight when it comes to offering and promoting Lifeline and Link-Up discounts,” NASUCA said. “The need for minimum outreach requirements could help remove the Lifeline and Link-Up discounts from the industry’s ‘best kept secrets’ list.”