“The objectives envisioned by the framers of the Telecom Act of ‘96 — competition, consumer choice, and rapid innovation — have been realized, not because of regulation but because of technology,” testified Ivan Seidenberg, Chairman and CEO of Verizon, at the third public hearing on telecommunications policy held by the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. Seidenberg said the old world of telecommunications is history and that in its place a new broadband industry is arising made up of super fast networks that deliver video, data and voice in entirely different ways. Seidenberg argued that today’s public policies are badly out of synch with market realities. He contends that government regulation of broadband networks and Internet services is both unnecessary and inappropriate. Verizon is calling for a market-based policy framework that would put it on “equal footing” with cable and wireless competitors. The company is also supporting Senator Sununu’s proposed legislation that would prevent VoIP from being subject to state or local regulations.
The success of the wireless, cable and broadband prove that “when government policy emphasizes investment in facilities-based competition, markets thrive and consumers benefit,” testified Brian Roberts, president and CEO of Comcast. In his view, only facilities-based competition is real, sustainable competition. Roberts argues that the reason there has been so little competition in local telephone services to date — particularly in the residential marketplace — is that the available technologies for delivering such services were so limiting. But now VoIP has arrived — opening the way for market entry and service differentiation. In particular, he believes VoIP will make cable a ubiquitous facilities-based telephone competitor. Roberts said the FCC already has the right ideas to promote facilities-based competition, break down barriers to entry, and reduce regulation.
The Telecom Act of ’96 failed “to anticipate the rapid development and deployment of the numerous alternative technology platforms and providers that have emerged as the most formidable competitors to the regulated local telephone companies,” said Scott Ford, president and CEO of ALLTEL. Today, telephone and cable companies are seeing their economic model move from one of “service provider” to that of “access provider.” He argued that while new access platforms are thriving, the traditional wireline telephone companies are “virtually prohibited from making the next generation investments required to be competitive over the next several years by the disparate regulatory and legal frameworks that exists across the country. ” Ford’s advice is that regulators should step aside and allow the marketplace to drive powerful new cycles of investment, innovation, and growth.
“Common carrier transmission services are the foundation of the information economy,” testified Garry Betty, president and CEO of Earthlink. He warned that if such services were no longer available to information service providers upon reasonable request on non-discriminatory terms and conditions, incumbents would be free to close their networks to any competitive providers, services, or innovations. Betty said it is crucial to distinguish between broadband information services and the underlying telecommunications services which deliver them. He warned against “so-called facilities-based competition” that actually creates a duopoly, or “double headed monopoly.” EarthLink contends that the sector is be served when consumers can choose their broadband providers regardless of which wire they use.
The Universal Service Support mechanism and the intercarrier compensation mechanism that are in place today must not be abandoned, testified Delbert Wilson, CEO of the Central Texas Telephone Cooperative, in order to preserve the public interest goals of ensuring affordable, high-quality telecommunications services in rural areas. Rural independent carriers serve about 7% of the country’s access lines but cover roughly 40% of the land mass. He emphasized that regulators have a responsibility to ensure that services are made available to all Americans, and not just the 92% majority served by many of the new policies emerging from the FCC. http://www.senate.gov
- Lessons from Telecom Act of ’96 — Part I :
David Dorman, AT&T
Richard Notebaert, Qwest Communications
James Geiger, ALTS
https://convergedigest.comsearchdisplay.asp?ID=10934&SearchWord=Senate
- Lessons from Telecom Act of ’96 — Part II :
Adam Thierer, The Cato Institute
Charles Ferguson, The Brookings Institution
George Gilder, The Discovery Institute
Reed E. Hundt, Former Chairman of the FCC
https://convergedigest.comsearchdisplay.asp?ID=10964&SearchWord=Senate
