FCC Kills Telco Reporting Requirements Nation's five largest telcos get huge gift from Kevin Martin Monday Sep 08 2008 13:46 EDT Tipped by viperlmw Last week we noted that the FCC was expected to give a major gift to AT&T, by no longer requiring the carrier provide data on network reliability, customer satisfaction and infrastructure investment. Instead, over the weekend the FCC gave that gift to all five of the nation's largest telcos (AT&T, Verizon, Qwest, Frontier and Embarq), with a few exceptions. In order to get approval for the move from FCC Democrats, FCC boss Kevin Martin had to promise they'd continue to require reliability and satisfaction data for two years. From the order: quote: We note that the reporting carriers have committed to continue collecting service quality and customer satisfaction data, and to filing those data publicly through ARMIS Report 43-05 and 43-06 filings for twenty four months from the effective date of this order. This will ensure continuity with regard to the service quality and customer satisfaction data that the Commission has collected up to this point, and afford the Commission a reasonable period of time to consider whether to adopt such industry-wide reporting requirements.
Of course the FCC isn't speedy when it comes to consumer protection, so the likely end-game of this decision involves these reporting requirements disappearing permanently. Consumer advocates, local regulators and small carriers have argued that the data is valuable, but AT&T lobbyists insisted that providing the data was too expensive. As usual, Democrat Michael Copps complains about the order, right before approving it: quote: ...it has been so troubling to see in to many instances the Commission headed down the road of collecting less data.While this compromise does create a risk that the aforementioned data will not be available after two years time, it gives the Commission the opportunity to do what it should have done a long time ago, which is to revise and update its reporting requirements.
While Republican FCC Commissioner and former telecom lobbyist Robert McDowell pretends that if something benefits AT&T lobbyists, it must also magically benefit consumers: quote: With this order, we are able to maintain effective consumer safeguards while also cleaning out unnecessary regulatory underbrush.
Of course everyone but the baby bells is arguing that this "regulatory underbrush" was providing data that would, were the FCC to actually make decisions based on data and not party or corporate loyalty, prove useful. Now an FCC that took nearly a decade to realize they should map broadband coverage faces a two year deadline to either craft strong new reporting guidelines that cover the broadband networks for all carriers, or allow the rules to lapse completely due to bureaucratic dysfunction and incumbent loyalty. All bets on the table. |
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium Member join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK Netgear WNDR3700v2 Zoom 5341J
1 recommendation |
KrK
Premium Member
2008-Sep-8 1:22 pm
W T F .... Martin, you shill....Someone explain to me how this can POSSIBLY be considered good news for consumers.
I mean we all knew Martin was pro-Telco and biased against... well.. EVERYTHING else.... but W T F man....
Hello, you work for the FCC, not at&t... at least, not yet!
Are you a sleeper agent?
[shakes head] | |
| | |
Re: W T F .... Martin, you shill....Not yet... He's preparing for his NEXT JOB after leaving as head of FCC. Don't you see, the more favors he gives, the bigger salary and more doors open to him after his term is over. | |
| | Dogfather Premium Member join:2007-12-26 Laguna Hills, CA |
to KrK
It's good for consumers in that when Martin is done he'll get a big Telco consulting job. When the gobbs of cash he'll get he'll buy goods and services stimulating the economy. At least that is the only way they could spin it. | |
| | | FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2008-Sep-8 3:50 pm
Re: W T F .... Martin, you shill....said by Dogfather:It's good for consumers in that when Martin is done he'll get a big Telco consulting job. Actually federal rules prohibit Martin from taking a job with those he regulated for at least a year. And by that time he will be running for office in NC for a state or congressional office to start off his career as an elected politician instead of an appointed one. | |
| | | | Airwolf7 Premium Member join:2004-12-12 Franklin, KY |
Airwolf7
Premium Member
2008-Sep-8 4:23 pm
Re: W T F .... Martin, you shill....Federal rules should forever prohibit a FCC Commissioner from taking a job with the companies they regulated.
One whole year is not to long to wait for your reciprocal back scratch.
Martian can't leave fast enough and may the door hit him in the ass on the way out. | |
| | | | | |
Re: W T F .... Martin, you shill....said by Airwolf7:Federal rules should forever prohibit a FCC Commissioner from taking a job with the companies they regulated. I bet that has a very narrow interpretation. Consultation groups and telco think tanks aren't regulated by the FCC. | |
|
| | | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY |
to FFH5
said by FFH5:said by Dogfather:It's good for consumers in that when Martin is done he'll get a big Telco consulting job. Actually federal rules prohibit Martin from taking a job with those he regulated for at least a year. And by that time he will be running for office in NC for a state or congressional office to start off his career as an elected politician instead of an appointed one. Hahahaha, by that time he will be in jail, I guarantee you - too many people got pissed by the Best Boy of Cheney.OTOH who the fuck would vote for such an utterly corrupt unscrupulous PoS scumbag like Martin anyway? | |
| | | | | funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA
1 recommendation |
Re: W T F .... Martin, you shill....I don't get what you mean.
Maybe without any curse words (please), could you perhaps explain what you mean by, "[Kevin Martin] will be in jail, I guarantee you - too many people got (?) by the Best Boy of Cheney."
Why will he be in jail? Is Martin the Best Boy of Cheney, or are you referring to someone else?
Assume little prior knowledge.
Thanks | |
| | | | | | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY 1 edit |
kamm
Member
2008-Sep-9 8:17 am
Re: W T F .... Martin, you shill.... This PoS scumbag Martin was Cheney's ball-licker advisor - his wife, Cathie Martin is the former Communications Director of Cheney (testified in the "Scooter" Libby perjury trial), a good friend of Bush counselor Dan Bartlett, another worm-like life form.... it seems these spineless worms like each others' company... similis simile gaudet, I guess. --said by bUU:Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them. PS: he will be sued, incdicted or ll together, I bet. He's been the worst head of the FCC, a criminal scumbag. | |
| | | | | | | funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA |
Re: W T F .... Martin, you shill....Thanks! I didn't know any of that! | |
|
| | | | NOCManMadMacHatter Premium Member join:2004-09-30 Colorado Springs, CO |
to kamm
Dunno, people did vote for Bush twice. | |
|
| funchordsHello MVM join:2001-03-11 Yarmouth Port, MA 1 edit |
to KrK
The only positive way I can think about this is that Martin's still trying to level the playing field between TelCos and CableCos -- where CableCos generally don't need to report this information and TelCos do.
If that's Martin's thinking, then the problem with it is that adding one competitor (and at that, only in some areas) to a monopoly does not bring the robust, competitive, self-regulating marketplace necessary to protect consumers.
Eliminating a consumer protection regulation because there actually are sufficient checks and balances is fine with me. Eliminating a consumer protection regulation because they're pretending that there are sufficient checks and balances is bad. | |
| | | marigoldsGainfully employed, finally MVM join:2002-05-13 Saint Louis, MO |
Re: W T F .... Martin, you shill....said by funchords:The only positive way I can think about this is that Martin's still trying to level the playing field between TelCos and CableCos -- where CableCos generally don't need to report this information and TelCos do. The CableCos do have to report this customer service information though if the governing franchise agreement requires it. It is one of the few regulations that applies to bundled services as well as video services. (It's not the exact same information, but it is very similar.) | |
|
tubbynetreminds me of the danse russe MVM join:2008-01-16 Gilbert, AZ |
cost savings to the user, or just ma bell's bottom line...?said by Karl Bode : but AT&T lobbyists insisted that providing the data was too expensive
any bets on whether or not the savings will be passed on to the subscriber? q. | |
| | |
Re: cost savings to the user, or just ma bell's bottom line...?said by tubbynet:said by Karl Bode : but AT&T lobbyists insisted that providing the data was too expensive
any bets on whether or not the savings will be passed on to the subscriber? q. Huh? Price hike to pay for new regulations. LOL. | |
| | |
to tubbynet
said by tubbynet: any bets on whether or not the savings will be passed on to the subscriber? q. there won't be any savings. that was just a throw-away BS line and half-ass attempt to justify getting rid of the rule. | |
|
amungus Premium Member join:2004-11-26 America |
amungus
Premium Member
2008-Sep-8 1:48 pm
sounds likeThey just don't care anymore - they're too busy funneling what data they have directly to the government's massive databases.
Seems like they just don't care about how "satisfied" the customer is, any new infrastructure, as long as they can tap it.
The new definition of service seems like it'll now be "it's tapped, it's done." | |
| TamaraBQuestion The Current Paradigm Premium Member join:2000-11-08 Da Bronx
1 recommendation |
TamaraB
Premium Member
2008-Sep-8 1:52 pm
Another sign of the times we have brought upon ourselves "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
| | tubbynetreminds me of the danse russe MVM join:2008-01-16 Gilbert, AZ |
Re: Another sign of the times we have brought upon ourselvesstill waiting for the obligatory conservative comment that this will reduce the overhead and government involvement in the private sector and thus be a good thing for competition... q. | |
| | | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY |
kamm
Member
2008-Sep-9 8:24 am
Re: Another sign of the times we have brought upon ourselvesYou must have missed TJunk's silly post where he tried to lie about some ulta-right-wing rent-a-writer 'policy' group and sell their supportive opinion as 'indfependent'... ROFL | |
|
FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2008-Sep-8 2:04 pm
There are some non-partisan groups that agree with FCC orderquote: Of course everyone but the baby bells is arguing that this "regulatory underbrush" was providing data that would, were the FCC to actually make decisions based on data and not party or corporate loyalty, prove useful.
Not everyone: » www.marketwatch.com/news ··· ist=hpprThe Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI) applauds the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) announcement Saturday that it will abandon the outdated and discriminatory ARMIS reporting requirements.
In comments filed with the Commission last week, director of the IPI Center for Technology Freedom Bartlett Cleland said these regulatory requirements applied only to a tiny portion of the communications industry, distorted the marketplace with irrelevant data and hindered the deployment of the best products and services to consumers.
Regulatory policy should be technologically neutral, says Cleland, and by ending the requirements for ARMIS reporting, the Commission will level the playing field for those in the marketplace.
When the ARMIS reports were first created they were said to be temporary, and yet, 18 years later, they continued to be required for only a handful of those who competed in the wireline communications marketplace.
"Even if this information had been collected broadly from the vast and rapidly changing communications industry, the fact is that the goal in collecting the information had long since been achieved," said Cleland.
In addition, both the states and FCC itself broadly collected similar data already, and the free market also already provided a more consumer friendly and accessible report. The Institute for Policy Innovation is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan public policy organization based in Dallas, Texas. | |
| | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY 4 edits
3 recommendations |
kamm
Member
2008-Sep-8 2:34 pm
Re: There are some non-partisan groups that agree with FCC ordersaid by FFH5:quote: Of course everyone but the baby bells is arguing that this "regulatory underbrush" was providing data that would, were the FCC to actually make decisions based on data and not party or corporate loyalty, prove useful.
Not everyone: » www.marketwatch.com/news ··· ist=hpprThe Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI) applauds the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) announcement Saturday that it will abandon the outdated and discriminatory ARMIS reporting requirements.
In comments filed with the Commission last week, director of the IPI Center for Technology Freedom Bartlett Cleland said these regulatory requirements applied only to a tiny portion of the communications industry, distorted the marketplace with irrelevant data and hindered the deployment of the best products and services to consumers.
Regulatory policy should be technologically neutral, says Cleland, and by ending the requirements for ARMIS reporting, the Commission will level the playing field for those in the marketplace.
When the ARMIS reports were first created they were said to be temporary, and yet, 18 years later, they continued to be required for only a handful of those who competed in the wireline communications marketplace.
"Even if this information had been collected broadly from the vast and rapidly changing communications industry, the fact is that the goal in collecting the information had long since been achieved," said Cleland.
In addition, both the states and FCC itself broadly collected similar data already, and the free market also already provided a more consumer friendly and accessible report. The Institute for Policy Innovation is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan public policy organization based in Dallas, Texas. » www.sourcewatch.org/inde ··· novationquote: The conservative Capital Research Center ranked IPI as amongst the most conservative groups in the US, scoring it as an eight on a scale of one to eight. [2] (Pdf)
Why are you keep spreading your LIES, TJunk?» www.businessweek.com/bwd ··· b016.htmquote: Peter Ferrara, a senior policy adviser at the conservative Institute for Policy Innovation, says he, too, took money from Abramoff to write op-ed pieces boosting the lobbyist's clients. "I do that all the time," Ferrara says. "I've done that in the past, and I'll do it in the future."
» www.prwatch.org/node/4298The Institute for Policy Innovation's Peter Ferrara also wrote "pay for play" columns for Abramoff, but, unlike Bandow, he isn't remorseful. "I've done it in the past, and I'll do it in the future," Ferrara said. Ferrara's boss also says the arrangement isn't "wrong or unethical." None of the columns contained any disclosure. BusinessWeek noted that the columns "provided a seemingly independent validation of the arguments the Abramoff team were using to try to sway Congressional action."About the level of corruption: » www.sourcewatch.org/inde ··· _FundingPayola-world: » www.sourcewatch.org/inde ··· t_PayolaThere you go - this is just another typical BS-spewing, indie-faking hardcore neocon-Republican-sponsored lying sack of shit lobby group... now wonder they applaud everything without a single brain cell that goes towards unchecked corporate power. | |
| | | | | | S_engineer Premium Member join:2007-05-16 Chicago, IL |
to kamm
Re: There are some non-partisan groups that agree with FCC ordersaid by kamm There you go - this is just another typical BS-spewing, indie-faking hardcore neocon-Republican-sponsored lying sack of shit lobby group... now wonder they applaud everything without a single brain cell that goes towards unchecked corporate power.
[/BQUOTE : Neo-con...did you learn a new word? Why is it you think half of this country has "Neo-con" beliefs? (Hint: it's got to do with the children) Do you believe Move-on.org is a liberal sack of shit lobby group? If not, then your just as biased as you accuse others of being! | |
| | | | |
| |
Mr Truthiness to FFH5
Anon
2008-Sep-8 2:37 pm
to FFH5
Bartlett Cleland worked for John Ashcroft and then Grover Norquist. I suppose on some planet, he could be considered nonpartison, unfortunately, not this one. Here's a cut and paste from Source Watch:
"Bartlett D. Cleland grew up in Illinois and graduated from Millikin University (IL) with a B.S. in philosophy and business administration. He received his MBA from St. Louis University and his J.D. from the St. Louis University School of Law. Bartlett Cleland is admitted to the Missouri bar.
After his study he worked for Lee Hecht Harrison as a consultant for executive outplacement. In 1994 he was a research assistant in the 'Ashcroft for Senate campaign', and in 1995 he worked for the then Missouri Senator John Ashcroft. He was the Senator's technology counsel from 1996 to 1998 where he worked with Paul Clement. Then he started working for Americans for Tax Reform and for a year and a half he was Grover Norquist's technology and policy counsel. Since 2000 Bartlett Cleland was the Director of the Center for Technology Freedom, at the Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI). The 'Center for Technology Freedom' was created when Bartlett Cleland joined IPI. [1] Kelli Emerick is a Research Fellow at this center." | |
| | | FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2008-Sep-8 2:41 pm
Re: There are some non-partisan groups that agree with FCC ordersaid by Mr Truthiness :
Bartlett Cleland worked for John Ashcroft and then Grover Norquist. I suppose on some planet, he could be considered nonpartison, unfortunately, not this one. Here's a cut and paste from Source Watch:
"Bartlett D. Cleland grew up in Illinois and graduated from Millikin University (IL) with a B.S. in philosophy and business administration. He received his MBA from St. Louis University and his J.D. from the St. Louis University School of Law. Bartlett Cleland is admitted to the Missouri bar.
After his study he worked for Lee Hecht Harrison as a consultant for executive outplacement. In 1994 he was a research assistant in the 'Ashcroft for Senate campaign', and in 1995 he worked for the then Missouri Senator John Ashcroft. He was the Senator's technology counsel from 1996 to 1998 where he worked with Paul Clement. Then he started working for Americans for Tax Reform and for a year and a half he was Grover Norquist's technology and policy counsel. Since 2000 Bartlett Cleland was the Director of the Center for Technology Freedom, at the Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI). The 'Center for Technology Freedom' was created when Bartlett Cleland joined IPI. [1] Kelli Emerick is a Research Fellow at this center." Seems well qualified to comment on technology issues and the FCC. | |
| | | | BoogeymanDrive it like you stole it Premium Member join:2002-12-17 Wasilla, AK
5 recommendations |
Re: There are some non-partisan groups that agree with FCC orderThe Pope is well qualified to speak about Catholosism, doesnt mean he is unbiased though. | |
| | | | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY |
to FFH5
said by FFH5:said by Mr Truthiness :
Bartlett Cleland worked for John Ashcroft and then Grover Norquist. I suppose on some planet, he could be considered nonpartison, unfortunately, not this one. Here's a cut and paste from Source Watch:
"Bartlett D. Cleland grew up in Illinois and graduated from Millikin University (IL) with a B.S. in philosophy and business administration. He received his MBA from St. Louis University and his J.D. from the St. Louis University School of Law. Bartlett Cleland is admitted to the Missouri bar.
After his study he worked for Lee Hecht Harrison as a consultant for executive outplacement. In 1994 he was a research assistant in the 'Ashcroft for Senate campaign', and in 1995 he worked for the then Missouri Senator John Ashcroft. He was the Senator's technology counsel from 1996 to 1998 where he worked with Paul Clement. Then he started working for Americans for Tax Reform and for a year and a half he was Grover Norquist's technology and policy counsel. Since 2000 Bartlett Cleland was the Director of the Center for Technology Freedom, at the Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI). The 'Center for Technology Freedom' was created when Bartlett Cleland joined IPI. [1] Kelli Emerick is a Research Fellow at this center." Seems well qualified to comment on technology issues and the FCC. ROFLMA is that all? Once again, you just embarrassed yourself, no matter how you try to sit it out in full silence. F | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | 1 edit |
to FFH5
said by FFH5:said by Mr Truthiness :
.. with a B.S. in philosophy and business administration. He received his MBA from St. Louis University and his J.D. from the St. Louis University School of Law.... Seems well qualified to comment on technology issues and the FCC. yes, philosophy and business administration provide an excellent background on technology issues; much better than say, telecommunications or computer science or engineering or one of those other boring majors. | |
| | | | | |
| KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium Member join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK Netgear WNDR3700v2 Zoom 5341J
1 recommendation |
KrK to FFH5
Premium Member
2008-Sep-9 3:12 am
to FFH5
said by FFH5:The Institute for Policy Innovation is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan public policy organization based in Dallas, Texas. LOL. Maybe "Dependent, for-profits, partisan private lobbyist organization based in Dallas, Texas." would be a lot more accurate.... This is bad for consumers. | |
|
kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY |
kamm
Member
2008-Sep-8 3:26 pm
Indict Martin...... he should stand trial for his criminal activities!
This circus should stop now - it's breathtaking what's going on at the FCC for a decade now.
The fact that these worm-like Cheney-species can act without ven a little worry, knowing there's no responsibility whatsoever should show you how far our the rot reaches in our legislative and executive branches now... | |
| |
wtfoperator
Anon
2008-Sep-9 6:05 am
its all goin down the tubesdoes this mean service in this country will get worse than it already is? it's just about time to jump ship like they did on the titanic. just take a minute to think about the comparison i will even get you started. the ship was big and supposedly technologically advanced but cheap part and labor were used kinda like how the telcos go cheap and ignore infrastructure. | |
| |
less reason to keep POTSsure, usually the fees you pay in addition to the overpriced POTS service help cover the cost of FCC oversight of telcos. this just adds to the long list of reasons why you should cancel your POTS phone line and tell the telcos where to stick it... generally, the same thing can be said for cell phones too! use voip over wifi instead! | |
|
| |
|
|