Plans for a draft House telecom bill markup are on hold until next year, lawmakers decided late Thurs. afternoon, when they couldn’t resolve differences. “We'll have a markup when we're ready to have a markup,” a panel spokesman said. David Hickey, telecom aide to Rep. Stearns (R-Fla.), said at a conference sponsored by the Practising Law Institute (PLI): “We want to get it done and we were debating a markup.”
A plan to reform the Universal Service Fund (USF) with more state control and a cap on growth got Sen. Sununu’s (R-N.H.) conditional backing at a Wed. forum sponsored by the Progress & Freedom Foundation (PFF), which also proposed the reform package. As it stands, the USF program “significantly distorts the marketplace, undermines innovation and limits services to customers,” Sununu said. PFF’s plan correctly aims to limit growth and increase efficiency, he said: “We've got too many programs that are on auto-pilot.”
Changing video habits could mean new markets for Fixed Satellite Services operators, and SES Global said it’s angling to go after them while competitors Intelsat and PanAmSat focus on combining. “Our peer group is preoccupied with merging and there’s a window of opportunity of at least three to five years to go after growth… under circumstances where there will be less competition,” said SES Global CFO Mark Rigolle at the UBS media conference Mon. And the evolving video market could offer SES just that opportunity, Rigolle said.
The satellite industry Tues. urged the FCC to reform the Universal Service Fund to promote broadband deployment in rural America, citing the President’s 2007 broadband goal and satellite broadband as an option. Chiming in on USF remedies in ex parte meetings at the Commission, Satellite Industry Assn. (SIA) officials called for a “technologically neutral” fix to the USF, which they called “complicated to administer” and “ill- suited to a world of convergence.”
Were the FCC to base the universal service contribution system on telephone numbers, elderly and low- income people would suffer financially, a coalition of public interest groups said Thurs. Emphasizing FCC Chmn. Martin’s support for a numbers-based plan, members of the Keep Universal Service Fund Fair Coalition said at a news conference the plan would hike phone charges paid by “the most vulnerable of Americans.” The current revenue-based collection plan only charges when long distance calls are made, but the numbers-based plan would charge a fixed $1 or $2 a month, said Linda Sherry, Consumer Action dir.- national priorities: “One of the most alarming aspects of the numbers-based proposal is that no one has yet produced an estimate of the effect of the change on low-income consumers… It does not make sense for the FCC or Congress to change the collection of USF funding without first taking a long, hard look at who would pay the piper for the so-called ’simplicity’ of a numbers-based plan.” The coalition released a report it said offers “the first public estimate of the number of vulnerable consumers… and the extra dollars they would be forced to pay” whether directly through higher USF costs or indirectly through higher phone rates. According to the report, about 16 million households, mostly low-income or elderly individuals, that generally make no long distance calls, would pay up to $383 million more “under the Martin scheme.” Another group of 27 million low-volume users would pay up to $324 million more, the report said. The FCC is considering several ways to reform the contributions system, which now collects from carriers about 10% of revenue that long distance calls generate. Carriers pass the costs on to consumers. The coalition offered a “compromise” plan in which the current revenue- based system would continue but with VoIP revenue added. The plan would cap contributions at 12-15% of interstate revenue. If that didn’t collect enough money to support the USF program, a small numbers-based contribution -- “cents rather than dollars” -- would take effect as a “fall back,” Sherry said. The FCC now uses a “pay as you use it” system and shouldn’t move to a numbers-based “pay as you don’t use it” plan, Sherry said. FCC officials didn’t comment on the groups’ analysis because a contributions reform plan hasn’t been proposed yet.
Universal service fund (USF) support would be used for broadband deployment, under a discussion draft released Thurs. of a bill by Reps. Terry (R-Neb.) and Boucher (D-Va.). The bill would expand the USF base by requiring payments into the fund by service providers that use telephone numbers or IP addresses or sell network connections. “To change USF, I believe that all who play must pay,” said Terry. He called the draft a vehicle for reform that would remedy “inequities that exist today.” Boucher said he’s seeking comments on the draft by Dec. 23 and plans to introduce a bill next year.
The Senate Wed. passed 94-5 the Science, Transportation, State & Commerce appropriations bill conference report, which contains $289.7 million for the FCC. The bill, which now heads to the President for signature, also extends the exemption from Anti-Deficiency Act rules for universal service fund (USF) programs. Rural groups welcomed passage of the bill, particularly a provision that prohibits the FCC from limiting USF support to only a primary line. The bill will give consumers access to telecommunications services at affordable rates, said OPASTCO Pres. John Rose.
House and Senate conferees agreed Fri. to exempt the universal service fund (USF) from Anti-Deficiency Act accounting rules for a year, and to bar the FCC from limiting USF support to primary lines. Senate Commerce Chmn. Stevens (R-Alaska) brokered the USF deal Thurs. night with House Commerce Chmn. Barton (R-Tex.), who wants to overhaul USF. Stevens thought he had sewn up the arrangement, but learned after the Thurs. conferees’ meeting that the primary-line provision wasn’t in the bill. “I didn’t sleep last night because of this amendment,” he told conferees during Fri.’s meeting, arguing passionately that the primary-line provision is essential in rural areas.
The FCC fined 2 telecom resellers a total of $699,412 for not contributing to the Universal Service Fund or adhering to requirements for registering and filing worksheets. Filings include financial data to help the FCC decide if carriers must contribute. The FCC fined Communication Services Integrated (CSII) $462,638 for not contributing, registering or filing worksheets until Feb. 2005, 4 years after starting operation. Global Teldata was fined $236,774 for similar violations, but only for a 2-year period. Global Teldata began making USF payments in Feb. but not enough, the FCC said. The firms’ violations were found by an FCC Enforcement Bureau project to identify resellers by comparing its list of registered service providers with lists of resellers from wholesale service providers. Both companies initially told the FCC they didn’t have enough interstate revenue to require universal service contributions. The bureau told them they still had to file worksheets. When they complied, the worksheets indicated both companies had enough revenue to require USF payments.
Telecom ‘05 Notebook: NARUC Legislative Dir. Brian Adkins gave state regulators and industry executives a tough choice during a panel discussion Wed. at Telecom ‘05: Name the one or 2 most important rules in telecom regulation. Many of them cited interconnection requirements or intercarrier compensation. “If we are going to level the playing field, we need to deal with intercarrier compensation, said CompTel Pres. Earl Comstock. Cal. PUC Comr. Susan Kennedy added no-fraud rules. Ia. Utilities Board Comr. Diane Munns said “technological neutrality” because “a lot of problems we have come from treating technologies differently.” N.D. PUC Pres. Tony Clark said rules that “insure we still have the gold standard, the one line that works when you pick it up.” He added universal service because without USF support “costs would be astronomical” in rural areas. The session late Wed. on state telecom policy was sponsored by N.Y. Law School’s Advanced Communications Law & Policy Institute.