FCC Seeks Comment on High Prison Phone Rates

The commission seeks comment on the feasibility of the Wright petition’s proposals that it establish a 20 cent-per-minute benchmark rate for domestic interstate interexchange inmate debit calling service, and 25 cents per minute for collect calls; and eliminate the call setup charge. The commission seeks additional data on the costs are associated with call security, and whether a rate cap would still allow ICS providers to be adequately compensated.

ICS providers in 2008 proposed a “marginal location” methodology, which advocates a two-part rate structure that includes both a fixed per-call charge of about $1.56 and a per-minute rate of 6 cents for debit calls, and a fixed charge of $2.49 and 7 cents per minute for collect calls. The FCC seeks comment on whether that methodology would be just and reasonable. The commission also seeks comment on the impact of rate reductions on call volumes; the possibility of tiered pricing based on monthly call volume; the use of prepaid calling as an alternative to collect and debit calling; and how intrastate and interstate rates differ.

"The telephone is a crucial instrument for the incarcerated, and those who care about them, because voice calling is often the only communications option available,” said Clyburn, who has been the commission’s most vocal proponent of ICS reform (CD Sept 26 p3). Inmates and their families often can’t afford the high per-minute cost of the phone call, or the expense of in-person visits, she said. “Why should the rest of us care? Maintaining contact with family and friends during incarceration not only helps the inmate, but it is beneficial to our society as a whole.” Rosenworcel said this is not just an issue of markets and rates, but “a broader issue of social justice.” High phone rates harm “all of us,” she said, “because we know that regular contact between prisoners and family members reduces recidivism."

Commissioner Ajit Pai generally believes prices should be “set by the free market rather than by government fiat,” he said. But Pai said he’s “open to exploring whether there is action we can and should take” to address the issues in the Wright petition. Pai also criticized the commission for taking nine years to act on the petition for rulemaking: “Martha Wright came to the Commission nine years ago, seeking redress for the high rates she paid to speak with her then-incarcerated grandson. When she did so, she could not have expected to wait longer for action on her petition than it took the prison system to release her grandson. Ms. Wright expected -- and deserved -- better."

The commission seeks comment on several other proposals in the record that do not directly address per-call and per-minute ICS rates. The notice seeks data on the existence of competition in the ICS market; how site commissions are funded; the prospect of offering a certain amount of no-cost calling per month in exchange for the right to charge a higher per-minute rate; how to bill for “non-geographic numbers” such as those from wireless or VoIP providers; the existence of ICS services using TTYs; and what to do about existing contracts.

Quantifying the costs or benefits of ICS rules is another potential difficulty, the commission said. “We seek to determine whether the proposals ... will provide public benefits that outweigh their costs, and we seek to maximize the net benefits to the public from any proposals we adopt.” The NPRM said it seeks a way to “help us quantify” the costs and benefits of, for instance, the argument that “inmate recidivism is decreased with regular family contact."

As the record develops, Commissioner Robert McDowell plans to “focus, in particular, on the Commission’s legal authority,” he said. The notice sought comment on the scope of the FCC’s authority to regulate ICS, and to address interstate interexchange ICS rates under Section 276 of the Communications Act, which requires that all payphone providers -- including ICS providers -- be “fairly” compensated. “Does the Commission have the authority to disallow an additional call set up charge when inmates’ calls are disconnected?” the NPRM asked. “Does the Commission have the legal authority to mandate that ICS providers offer debit calling? What legal authority does the Commission have to address the site commissions common in ICS contracts?” Noting many calls made from correctional facilities are intrastate, the commission asked how it could “encourage states to reevaluate their policies.”

NARUC applauded the FCC, citing the association’s November resolution asking the commission to prohibit unreasonable interstate ICS rates and charges. “Incredibly, it is less expensive for a consumer in the U.S. to call overseas than it is to accept a collect phone call from a prisoner in another State,” the association said in a statement. The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights encouraged the FCC to adopt a rule quickly. It said that until then, “families will be bearing the burden of predatory phone rates, which is particularly difficult during the holiday season.” United Church of Christ Policy Adviser Cheryl Leanza said that by issuing its proposal, “the FCC has started its journey to end the immoral system of gouging families of prisoners.” Securus will file comments in the docket, and looks forward to working with the FCC, said the company’s lawyer, Stephanie Joyce of Arent Fox. Comments are due in docket 12-375 60 days after the NPRM appears in the Federal Register, replies 30 days later.