how-to block ads
|
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
 ·Cox HSI
| What's the USF for? No. I'd like to see the USF disbanded entirely. That way no one would have to pay for someone else's phone service. Pnh102's question was "Why is it OK to compel any business to serve an unprofitable market?" My response would be "Because Congress created the USF whereby all telephone subscribers pay the ILECs to serve the unprofitable markets." I was trying to be polite.
For the record, there are large areas of Arkansas served by SBC (ATT now). While it may be true that most of the state's land area is served by independent phone companies, most of the people live in a handful of cities which are inside the green and yellow areas on your map.
I live in one of the green boxes. And there's still been a Stinger box operating at the end of the street for 2 years now. No investment would appear to be required - simply a willingness to offer service. | |
|  
batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: What's the USF for? said by dg2  :I live in one of the green boxes. And there's still been a Stinger box operating at the end of the street for 2 years now. No investment would appear to be required - simply a willingness to offer service. What is the franchise law for CATV? NJ just passed a state wide law and FIOS deploment is improving. | |
| |
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Re: What's the USF for? According to our municipal folks, CATV is regulated by the Feds only. They already charge a franchise fee for utilities operating within the city limits (CATV and telco both).
I really don't know what the state's franchise laws for CATV are. I probably should, but the laws don't really seem to matter in this discussion - all the companies are pretty much doing whatever they want, and no one seems inclined to regulate them to any great extent.
And, to answer your next post, I oppose the USF on principal. I'd like to think I'd feel the same if I got some benefit from it. Smells like communism at first whiff - then when you find out it's largely unregulated (there do not seem to be any real expectations for the telcos to actually spend this money on services), it sounds like Congress handed the telcos a windfall from the consumers' pockets. | |
| | |
batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs:
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: What's the USF for? said by dg2 :According to our municipal folks, CATV is regulated by the Feds only. They already charge a franchise fee for utilities operating within the city limits (CATV and telco both). Whoever you talked to gave you incorrect information. CATV is controlled no higher then State level at this time and mostly at the municipal level. Telephone is not subject to franchise fees.
Telephone is over 100 years old and they were the only show in town so a franchise was not necessary. They are covered by a tariff and it is at the state and federal level. TPC is the provider of last resort mandated by federal law. They have to bring POTS to anybody anywhere in there tariff area.
quote:
The Arkansas Public Service Commission regulates telecommunications service providers that include incumbent local telephone carriers, competitive local telephone carriers, long distance companies, and private pay telephone companies. The Commission has authority to regulate the quality of service of all telecommunications providers but has limited authority to regulate rates, terms, and conditions of services. The limitations are in accordance with Arkansas Code Annotated Section 23-17-400 et seq. that recognizes the desire to have competitive forces control rates, terms, and conditions of services.
»www.arkansas.gov/psc/telecom.htm | |
| | | | |
|
