All Forms of Communication Should Pay USF, Stevens Says
The Universal Service Fund (USF) should be tied to all forms of communication, Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. Stevens (R-Alaska) said Tues. at a hearing on the fund’s contribution rules. “This technology is changing so fast” a law is needed that can work for some time, Stevens said. It doesn’t make sense for Congress to rewrite complex rules and then have to change them again because of technology changes. He said the Committee is determined to get a fair set of principles on “who pays in and who pays out” and to eradicate abuses in the program.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Stevens, like other senators from rural areas, is protective of USF, which helped deliver them phone service at reasonable prices. But they acknowledge the problems with dwindling funds as consumers switch to wireless and VoIP while payouts increase. “We must make sure the law keeps pace with the changing landscape,” said Sen. Burns (R-Mont.), who has introduced a bill (S-2256) that would broaden the contribution base and require the FCC to develop a neutral distribution methodology. “We've got to pass this bill this year,” Burns said. “I'm glad this debate is under way.”
Wireless carriers told the committee they're wary of “anticompetitive” proposals that would discriminate against their industry. CTIA told the committee it believes a contribution system based on numbers and capacity is the best alternative. The group prepared a proposal for the FCC outlining its ideas for moving from a revenue-based collection system to a number-based model, said CTIA Asst. Vp Regulatory Affairs Paul Garnett. The proposal includes “safe harbors” for some consumers -- a crucial concern of AARP. They include Lifeline and Link-Up customers, which wouldn’t be required to pay into the fund.
Cable told the Committee that it shouldn’t have to pay USF for its broadband services, saying it would be counter- productive and raise prices on consumers. The industry also told the Committee that USF funds shouldn’t be used to promote broadband deployment, said Tom Simmons, vp-public policy, Midcontinent Communications.
“There’s a growing consensus for Martin’s numbers-based approach,” said Sen. Sununu (R-N.H.), adding: “We need to be talking about real reform.” But not all members are eager to see USF continue in its current form. “Congress is at a crossroads. We cannot continue this entitlement concept in a competitive marketplace, particularly as we look at the growing allegations of waste, fraud and abuse,” said Sen. DeMint (R-S.C.). “I don’t question the importance of the fund. But I hope we have the courage… to create a globally competitive model for telecom.”