The draft telecom bill (S-2686) was too hard on cities, Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. Stevens (R-Alaska) said Wed. at the first of 2 hearings on it. Acknowledging as “fair criticism” complaints about the bill’s local franchising provisions, Stevens said those parts of the bill were “put in by others.” Stevens said he takes “credit or blame” for the bill’s handling of net neutrality, but wants more Democratic input before revising the bill.
Federal Universal Service Fund
The FCC's Universal Service Fund (USF) was created by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to fund programs designed to provide universal telecommunications access to all U.S. citizens. All telecommunications providers are required to contribute a percentage of their end-user revenues to the Fund, which the FCC allocates for four core programs: 1. Connect America Fund, which subsidizes telecom providers for the increased costs of offering services to customers in rural and remote areas 2. Lifeline, which directly subsidizes low-income households to help pay for the cost of phone and internet service 3. Rural Health Care, which subsidizes health care providers to offer broadband telehealth services that can connect rural patients and providers with specialists located farther away 4. E-Rate, which subsidizes rural and low-income schools and libraries for internet and telecommunications costs The Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) administers the USF on behalf of the FCC, but requires Congressional approval for its actions. Many states also operate their own universal service funds, which operate independently from the federal program.
Communities across the Empire State should look to Philadelphia’s model of offering municipal broadband access to citizens, N.Y. Attorney Gen. Eliot Spitzer (D) told the Personal Democracy Forum conference in N.Y.C. Mon. The gubernatorial candidate said the problem “isn’t a lack of resources, it’s a lack of imagination and a lack of leadership.”
The Senate likely will learn the “hard way” to pare a 10-title telecom bill to get it passed, Rep. Pickering (R- Tenn.) said Tues. at a Pike & Fischer lunch. Pickering called the Senate’s broader approach to telecom legislation a “generous hodgepodge of issues” that need to be addressed.
WHITE SULFUR SPRINGS, W.Va. -- If FCC staff could change communications law, they'd get the agency Sunshine Act relief, many said when asked at an FCBA seminar here for their “wish lists” for Congressional action. Another top wish: Expanding Universal Service Fund contributions by including intrastate and interstate revenue, now barred by statute. Both changes are pending in a bill introduced by Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. Stevens (R-Alaska).
The satellite industry hailed language deep in a telecom bill by Sen. Stevens (R-Alaska) that would strengthen the satellite industry’s hand in 2 arenas where it claims unique utility: disaster communication and rural broadband deployment. If the bill’s satellite provisions survive conference, “it’s a big win for the satellite industry,” Satellite Industry Assn. (SIA) Exec. Dir. David Cavossa.
Prospects are good for passage of a telecom bill the President can sign this Congress, House Telecom Subcommittee Chmn. Upton (R-Mich.) told a Tues. National Journal breakfast. “Their bill is not all that far away from ours,” Upton said, referring to a Senate telecom bill introduced Mon. (CD May 2 p1). That bill, especially its franchise provision, offers a “hook” to get something into conference where the 2 can be reconciled, Upton said.
Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. Stevens (R-Alaska) Mon. introduced a telecom bill reflecting several members’ input but lacking strong Democratic support. The 10-title bill hits Universal Service Fund (USF) reform, municipal broadband, net neutrality, white spaces and broadcast flag, and would close the terrestrial loophole for cable. Bell companies applauded the Stevens bill.
Consumers in 12 states would be hardest hit by a proposal before the FCC to move to a numbers-based system for contributing to the Universal Service Fund, the Keep USF Fair Coalition said Thurs. The coalition said consumer bills would go up the most in Cal., Fla., Ill., Md., Mass., Mich., Minn., N.Y., O., Pa., Tex. and Va. In all of those states except Tex. and Minn. “consumers already pay more in federal USF taxes than their states get back for schools, hospitals and rural connectivity and that disparity would grow even wider” under the plan supported by FCC Chmn. Martin, the group said. Tex. and Minn. would move from being USF “winners,” taking in more USF funding than paying out, to being USF “losers,” the coalition said.
The FCC shouldn’t apply new universal service definitions to rural telcos’ operations as a result of a proceeding involving the Bells and other “non-rural” telcos, rural telcos said. The issue came up in response to an FCC request for comments on how to respond to a remand by the 10th U.S. Appeals Court, Denver, in Qwest v. FCC. The court had questioned definitions the FCC planned to use to decide if the larger firms qualified for high-cost universal service support in some areas. The debate centers on how the FCC defines Telecom Act requirements that universal service support be “sufficient” and “reasonably comparable.”
The FCC is using a “hoax” argument that the Universal Service Fund (USF) contribution process is broken to justify fee hikes, a citizen group charged Fri. The USF contribution formula “requires at most minor adjustments that can be accomplished without hefty increases in federal phone fees,” the Keep USF Fair Coalition said. The group opposes FCC Chmn. Martin’s proposal to move from a long distance revenue- based system to one based on how many telephone numbers a carrier serves, claiming it would penalize low-volume long distance callers. At a news event set for today (Mon.), the group will discuss “the phony USF funding crisis.” A Tues. Senate hearing will address USF contribution methodology. Progress & Freedom Foundation Pres. Ray Gifford said the coalition’s view “is contrary to established fact.” The long distance industry, which is the basis for the current contributions system, “is in decline and it makes no sense as a funding vehicle for universal service in the age of VoIP technology.” A PFF working group has endorsed per-line fees.