Save Access

from: Technology Daily also see:another astroturf

State Groups Fight Pre-Emption For Wireless Industry In Telecom Bill

By David Hatch

(Friday, September 8) A broad coalition of state utility groups, attorneys general and watchdogs urged lawmakers to kill a proposal to pre-empt state regulation of the wireless industry.

The language -- part of a comprehensive telecommunications overhaul measure that cleared the Senate Commerce Committee in late June -- would place the FCC in charge of handling wireless customer complaints.

"Why is this section in the bill today?" Billy Jack Gregg, director of the consumer advocate division of West Virginia's Public Service Commission, asked rhetorically at a briefing for Hill staffers.

Answering his own question Gregg asserted, "One reason: CTIA, the cellular association, got it in there. Why? For consumers? No. For the wireless industry" -- so that it could avoid state regulatory oversight.

Gregg and other speakers said state regulators would lose the ability to resolve disputes involving billing, contracts, coverage areas, deceptive practices and other concerns if the language is enacted.

Jeannine Kenney, a senior policy analyst at Consumers Union, insisted the FCC does not have the resources to handle customer complaints.

"This bill is riddled with problems," she said, "It is a train wreck for consumers."

Philip Jones, a regulator with the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, emphasized that the wireless industry -- which has 210 million customers -- is robust and competitive under the status quo.

"This industry is not hurting, so we fail to see what the problem is," Jones said.

The strong rhetoric underscored the challenges faced by Senate Commerce Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, in corralling support to move the bill, H.R. 5252, to the Senate floor.

For its part, CTIA countered that it is untenable for mobile phone service to be regulated differently by 50 states.

"This is about costs to consumers," CTIA spokesman Joe Farren said. "Wireless consumers are best served when the industry is regulated on a consistent national basis."

Farren warned that if the pre-emption language is dropped from the bill, states might eventually craft varying regulations, forcing carriers to comply with inconsistent laws.

The pre-emption language "does nothing at all to interfere with a state attorney general's existing right to investigate and prosecute bad actors" in the telecom sector, he said.

At Friday's briefing, William Brauch, director of the consumer protection division in Iowa attorney general's office, said he is preparing a letter to members of Congress urging them to oppose the pre-emption provisions. Signers so far include the attorneys general from Iowa and North Dakota.

Meanwhile, on another telecom bill-related front, the Senate Commerce panel announced Thursday that 14 organizations -- mostly religious and conservative family groups -- support the Senate bill's hands-off approach to Internet regulation.

Backers include Americans for Tax Reform, Morality in Media and the Traditional Values Coalition.

The announcement appears to be an effort to blunt criticism leveled by the Christian Coalition that the measure would allow major high-speed Internet providers to dominate the Internet by charging fees for premium treatment.

The House and Senate versions of the telecom overhaul measure share similar goals -- such as expediting Bell company entry into video programming -- but the Senate version is more comprehensive.