Your message of 1/9/98 seems well-intentioned, but misses reality. 1. Low cost "Lifeline" services ALREADY exist for the poor and elderly (mandated by law). These provisions are not expected to change in the next decade.
2. "Competitive" technologies for internet access such as cable modems STILL REQUIRE CONTINUOUS TELEPHONE ACCESS to transmit commands, requests, and uploads to (hopefully) a local telephone number. This alternate does NOT change the issue at this stage of cable modem development. 3. UNLESS the adult individual is unemployed, routine and extensive use of a phone line for internet access (at the expense of sacraficing all incoming calls) usually leads to the installation of a SECOND line. This leads to ADDED monthly charges by the telco provider that wasn't there before; hence, MORE $$$ for the telco provider. NOTE: Extensive phone use by kids almost invariably leads to a second (or third) line installation; hence, the telco provider WINS AGAIN!!! 4. Last, but certainly not the least error, the local telco supplier is the ONLY provider. That is, THERE IS NO COMPETITION to drive the market to a competitive level. The new telco laws simply allow other baby bells to have access via the local provider's installed infrastructure (i.e., telephone lines, routers, switchers, etc.) at "reasonable" prices. To allow an existing monopoly to "maximize profits" would crucify services to the general public. My recommendation: FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL TO PREVENT ANY RATE HIKE!!!! Mike Conn Mikon Consulting Santa Clara, CA
