MCA on the social web
Act Now.
Enter your contact info.
If you would like to support us, please click below.
Contributions are not tax deductible.
You Axed the Wireless Tax!
On March 11, after weeks of getting bombarded by thousands of letters, phone calls, and e-mails from Oklahoma consumers, the Commission unanimously voted to postpone consideration of the statewide toll-free calling plan. The vote effectively “Axes the Wireless Tax” for now. MCA supporters who contacted the Commission deserve full credit for helping the Commissioners realize the proposal needed to be more carefully examined. Congratulations for making sure your voices were heard!
Axe the Wireless Tax Campaign Timeline
In mid January, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC), the state agency tasked with regulating utilities across the state, began a process to study whether a statewide toll-free calling area would be a good idea.
After the process began, The Oklahoman ran an article about the proposal that looked at arguments both for and against the plan. The next day, the Tulsa World ran an editorial which pointed out that the OCC’s “toll-free” plan would not really be free – after all, someone would have to pay for it, right?
Soon after, The Oklahoman reported what the Tulsa World editorial writers had already guessed – that the plan would cost consumers roughly $2.00 per month per line in additional fees. This new fee would be for ALL phone lines, regardless of whether they are landlines, cellular lines, or Internet phone lines. The $2.00 figure was only an initial estimate from the OCC staff, which meant the additional monthly fees could end up being even higher.
Well, it didn’t take long for the Commission staff to revise their initial estimate. On February 22nd, Commission staff released a supplemental economic analysis which showed a new estimate of $3.19 per month per line, which was quickly reported by The Oklahoman.
The media initially reported that the OCC had until April 1st to send their proposal to the state legislature. Once it became clear that the OCC plan was a serious possibility, opinions started rolling in about whether statewide toll-free calling made sense for Oklahoma consumers.
Leading off those opinions was the Hughes County Times in Wetumka, (PDF file), and it wasn’t good news for the OCC’s plan.
On February 19th, Mid-American Communications Alliance filed an official comment with the Commission opposing the plan and began a statewide grassroots effort to convince the OCC to scrap the proposal.
On February 24th, the Tulsa World published an editorial publicly opposing the Commission plan, calling the proposal a “waste of time” and “a bad deal for most telephone users in Oklahoma.”
On February 25th, the Oologah Lake Leader published an editorial in opposition of the OCC proposal, (PDF file) calling the plan “a child of Satan that should be strangled in its cradle before it can get any bigger and cause Oklahoma irreparable harm.”
On February 26th, The Oklahoman, the state’s largest newspaper, published an editorial opposing a statewide toll-free calling plan and urging the Commission to “hang up on this idea.”
On March 4th, The Oklahoman reported that debate surrounding the OCC proposal was raging and that there were questions about whether the Commission even had the legal jurisdiction to implement the plan.
On March 5th, the Tulsa World published a letter to the editor from MCA’s Executive Director urging the Commission to scrap the toll-free calling plan.
On March 11, after weeks of being inundated by thousands of letters, phone calls, and e-mails from MCA supporters and other Oklahoma consumers, the Commission unanimously voted to postpone consideration of the statewide toll-free calling plan. The vote effectively “Axed the Wireless Tax,” putting the brakes on a rushed and ill-conceived proposal.
Axe the Wireless Tax
FCC Votes to Move Net Neutrality Rules Forward
In a 3-2 vote along party lines, the Federal Communications Commission began moving forward with open-Internet regulations.
The FCC proceeding to consider net neutrality rules is the culmination of contentious lobbying by the telecom industry and an intense exchange of letters from members of Congress.
With Thursday’s vote, the five-member panel began the process to move forward with open-Internet regulations announced last month by the agency’s chairman, Juilus Genachowski. His proposal would formally codify the FCC’s four principles intended to prevent Internet service providers from giving preferential treatment to certain content and services and therefore deciding which applications consumers have access to. He also proposed two additional principles, one to ensure providers do not discriminate between applications and another to require Internet companies to disclose their network management practices to consumers.
Genachowski had the full support of Democratic Commissioners Micheal Copps and Mignon Clyburn, as expected. Republican Commissioners Robert McDowell and Meredith Atwell Baker dissented on the idea that government regulation is needed to keep the Internet open, but supported the beginning of a fact-finding process to learn more about the technical and legal questions surrounding net neutrality.
UCLA Study: Elderly Can Benefit from Internet Usage
Adults with little Internet experience show changes in their brain activity after just one week online, a new study finds.
The results suggest Internet training can stimulate neural activation patterns and could potentially enhance brain function and cognition in older adults.
As the brain ages, a number of structural and functional changes occur, including atrophy, or decay, reductions in cell activity and increases in complex things like deposits of amyloid plaques and tau tangles, which can impact cognitive function.
Research has shown that mental stimulation similar to the stimulation that occurs in individuals who frequently use the Internet may affect the efficiency of cognitive processing and alter the way the brain encodes new information.
Just days before its possible October 22 vote on new “net neutrality” regulations, the Federal Communications Commission is being bombarded with messages from high-ranking elected officials telling the commissioners to tone it down.
The messages, from both Republicans and a surprisingly high number of Democrats, seek to persuade the FCC commissioners to slow down and take a deep breath before placing oppressive regulations on an Internet industry that has brought innovation and investment to communities across America.
As the Wall Street Journal reported:
At last count, there have been 11 letters from governors (a mix of Republicans and Democrats), 18 Republican Senators, House minority leadership and now, the 72 House Democrats, which includes 18 members of the Congressional Black Caucus, 31 Blue Dog Democrats and 10 members of the House Energy & Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over the FCC.
In the letter signed by 72 House Democrats, the lawmakers conclude, “In light of the growth and innovation in new applications that the current regime has enabled, as compared to the limited evidence demonstrating any tangible harm, we would urge you to avoid any tentative conclusions which favor government regulation.”
Of the 72 House Democrats signing the letter, six are from states where MCA operates:
Arkansas
Rep. Mike Ross
Kansas
Rep. Dennis Moore
Missouri
Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay
Rep. Russ Carnahan
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver
Oklahoma
Rep. Dan Boren
These six account for two-thirds of all House Democrat members from the MCA states.
And anytime 72 Democrat Members of the U.S. House of Representatives agree that increased regulation is bad, people should take notice. In this case, the people taking notice should be the FCC commissioners.
The big question is why are so many lawmakers from both sides of the aisle coming to the conclusion that “net neutrality” regulations would be harmful? Here are several reasons:
1. Competition and innovation are thriving without burdensome regulations
As MCA pointed out in this opinion piece, competition in the wireless market has benefitted millions of consumers by providing more choice, more innovation, and the lowest cost in the world for wireless service. Americans use their wireless devices more than the citizens of any other country because a light regulatory structure has allowed competition to thrive. There is no reason for the FCC to fix something that isn’t broken.
2. Network investment will suffer if “net neutrality” regulations are imposed by the FCC.
As House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, and House Republican whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., recently wrote in a letter to President Obama, “We believe that network neutrality regulations would actually thwart further broadband investment and availability, and that a well-reasoned broadband plan would confirm our view,” Boehner and Cantor concluded, “So to hastily begin the process of adopting network neutrality rules months before issuing such a plan implies that politics are driving the FCC’s decision-making process.”
3. The Internet must remain free to be an economic driver for the U.S. economy.
“As Americans wade through the current economic situation, a decision by the FCC to discourage broadband investment would be irresponsible,” Boehner and Cantor wrote. “The United States needs broadband providers to increase investment and create jobs. This will not occur if broadband providers are saddled with unnecessary, burdensome requirements that interfere with their ability to manage their networks and create innovative broadband products that maximize consumer choice and benefit.”
4. Proposed “net neutrality” regulations would hamper President Obama’s goal of universal broadband access and threaten minority communities.
In a recent letter to FCC commissioners, numerous minority groups including the NAACP, the League of United Latin American Citizens, and the National Disability Institute argued that imposing new rules on Internet traffic could impede Obama’s goal of 100% broadband access for America. The groups stated, “As organizations that serve communities that are among the most severely impacted by a lack of access to technology, we urge you to keep your number one focus on the need to get everyone connected. We are concerned that some of the proposed regulations on the Internet could, as applied, inhibit the goal of universal access and leave disenfranchised communities further behind. We are also concerned that some proposed regulations could inhibit investments being made by companies employing hundreds of thousands of workers and connecting millions to the opportunities that broadband technology affords to those in our community – from telemedicine to distance learning to applying for jobs online.”
But if the flood of bipartisan objections to the their proposed “net neutrality” rules isn’t enough for the FCC commissioners, now members of the general public can voice their opposition to the proposed regulations as well.
If you agree with these bipartisan groups and numerous Republican and Democrat lawmakers that “net neutrality” regulations would be bad for America, MCA urges you to click this link to post on the FCC’s blog and let them know how you feel.
Also, feel free to leave a comment here in our blog!
Union Tells FCC ‘Net Neutrality’ Rule May Squelch Investment
The Communications Workers of America, a union with workers at AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc., urged U.S. regulators to protect investment and job creation as they craft rules on Internet competition.
“We depend on private capital” to invest in networks, Larry Cohen, president of the union, said in a letter today to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski. The union distributed the letter by e-mail.
The Communications Workers joins AT&T, Verizon and Comcast Corp. in expressing concern after Genachowski said last month that he wanted “net neutrality” rules to prevent companies from favoring some content providers over others. The companies have said the rules aren’t necessary and may hinder their ability to manage their networks.
Missouri Telephone Access Fees Need Reform!
Over the past three years, the Mid-American Communications Alliance’s advocacy efforts have helped bring innovative new services, lower prices, and more choices to Missouri consumers. MCA also strives to provide consumers with the latest information regarding communications services and technology. In keeping with that mission, we wanted to inform you that during the upcoming 2010 session of the Missouri General Assembly, state lawmakers will debate legislation to reform the way rural phone service is funded in Missouri. Take a moment to watch this short, two-minute video about why the current system of unbalanced switched access fees needs to be reformed.
Mobile Future Releases New Report on Wireless Innovation
In late May, MCA had the opportunity to host a “Better Life with Wireless” forum at Oklahoma Christian University. Our keynote speaker at the event was Jonathan Spalter, Chairman of Mobile Future. Jonathan’s presentation at that event provided excellent insight into the state of wireless technology today and where it is headed tomorrow.
For those of you that missed our May event, take a moment to read a short white paper, just released by Mobile Future, that takes a look at how wireless innovation is transforming our economy and our lives.
Click here to download a PDF copy of Mobile Future’s white paper.
Antitrust Inquiries into Wireless are Puzzling
Recent announcements that the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division and the Federal Communications Commission plan to conduct inquiries into how wireless telecommunications firms operate have left many industry observers wondering just what DOJ officials are thinking. After eight years of relatively lax antitrust investigations under President George W. Bush, many consider reinvigorated antitrust efforts to be a good thing.
Clearly, from a consumer perspective, it makes sense to ask questions of companies and industries regarding antitrust issues where a clear lack of competition exists. However, the recent moves by Justice and the FCC are puzzling because in the case of wireless communications today, competition is alive and well.
Throughout Missouri, wireless competition is evident. In urban St. Louis, the hundreds of thousands of residents have numerous choices when it comes to wireless service. According to the independent website myrateplan.com, people living in Saint Louis city have no less than seven options for a wireless carrier among prepaid and postpaid providers. Even more impressive, is that the 1,493 residents of Steelville, Missouri can choose between five different prepaid and postpaid providers.
Overall, 95% of the U.S. population has a choice of three or more wireless service providers and 60% have a choice of five or more. The choices are even more staggering when it comes to the number of wireless devices. Currently, U.S. consumers can choose from over 30 different manufacturers and from over 600 devices. In comparison, consumers in the United Kingdom have only 147 devices to choose from.
While choice is certainly a valuable measure of competition, so is price. On this front, U.S. consumers come out on top. A Banc of America Securities study from earlier this year showed that since 1994, the cost of a wireless minute in the U.S. has fallen nearly 90% to just five cents per minute. This is the lowest cost per minute among 26 industrialized member nations within the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development. This low cost per minute is probably why U.S. customers lead the world with an average of 829 minutes of usage per month – nearly twice as many minutes as runner-up, Hong Kong.
So whether the measuring stick is number of choices among service providers, number of choices among wireless devices, or cost for usage, the American wireless industry is not only competitive, but it is among the most competitive in the world. As the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division and the FCC continue to look at the wireless industry, it should become apparent that their efforts would be better focused on industries where a true lack of competition really exists.
Watch video of MCA at the MLB All-Star Game!
