>Expanding the pool of telecommunications companies and services that >contribute to the USP would go a long way toward providing program >stability. Source: CRN
Bonnie, I have a different perspective on this. The USF funding has become a slush fund for large phone companies. The largest amount doesn't go to the E-Rate but to the 'high-cost fund' which goes to companies who are some of the most profitable in the US. Worse, the Stevens Bill would increase the Erate on phone customers 233% because it now adds money directly to the local part of ALL phone bills -thus, it increases everyone's phone bill including wireless, broadband and VOIP. http://www.newnetworks.com/usfanalysis.htm Some states also have 'high-cost-funds' added to phone bills. And when it comes to funding broadband and other services, including wiring of schools and libraries, states also have created funds to do this based on adding charges to local phone rates. Do you really want to increase phone taxes when they go to companies who don't need it? While I'm totally for the Erate to exist and pay for schools and libraries to have great service, the real issue isn't increasing the total fund but getting rid of all of the abuses so that the schools can get more money. --- And finding out what happened to the commitments already paid for by customers. Example: Ohio... by 2000, everything should be wired with fiber? -- didn't happen but customers paid for it. Ohio Alternate Regulation Plan, September 20, 1994 "21. INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITMENTS The Company's infrastructure commitment in this Plan shall consist of the commitment to deploy, within five years of the effective date of the Plan and within the Company's existing service territory, broadband two-way fully interactive high quality distance learning capabilities to all state chartered high schools including vocational, technical schools, colleges and universities; deploy broadband facilities to all hospitals, libraries, county jails and state, county and federal court buildings." The Steven's Bill also favors 2 states -- Alaska and Hawaii, and even has sections of the bill dedicated to 'unserved' broadband areas --adding an additional $1/2 billion to the USF. Senator Stevens is from Alaska and Innouye is from... And the new digital divide is being created now with the "Franchise" issue. The Bell companies want to pick and choose which cities they wire -- thus, rich ones... do the rich communities really need 'cable competition to lower prices?" The Bell companies' plans are in fact, crippled networks. http://www.newnetworks.com/fioslightspeed.htm For example, in Asia today, the companies supply 100 Mbps services in both directions for $40. In the US today, the best we have is DSL over the 100 year old copper wiring.., And the deep, dark, secret is that America already paid for upgrades to networks, not to mention the wiring of schools and libraries -- not with DSL but with fiber. --- 45mpbs in both directions, to the home and office. I've written about this in my Harvard Nieman Watchdog articles. http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=about.viewContributor&bio id=130 Ironically, Net Neutrality shouldn't even be an issue because customers paid for 'open', ubiquitous networks, and the phone companies have been able to turn common carrier services into exclusive clubs for themselves. If you really want to give everyone a fair shake, it's time for some accountability -- audits, and other important evaluation tools. Bruce Kushnick, Teletruth _______________________________________________ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
