[IP] VERIZON GETS BREAK ON BUSINESS BROADBAND
Begin forwarded message:
From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: March 21, 2006 11:30:37 AM EST
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] VERIZON GETS BREAK ON BUSINESS BROADBAND
Reply-To: dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[Note: I posted an item on this yesterday. The comments of
Commissioners Coops and Adelstein are worth reading. DLH]
VERIZON GETS BREAK ON BUSINESS BROADBAND
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Despite the opposition of two of the four sitting FCC commissioners,
the FCC Monday granted Verizon relief from regulations on the
provision of high-speed broadband service to large business
customers. Verizon filed the so-called "forbearance" petition in
December 2004 per the 1996 Telecommunications act, which allows the
FCC to exempt companies from regulations under certain circumstances.
(If the Commission does not deny the petition in a year for failure
to meet the criteria for forbearance, it is granted by default.)
Verizon promised to continue to pay into the Universal Service Fund
for the business services. That fund helps pay for broadband roll-out
to poorer or hard-to-reach areas. Verizon also said it would continue
to make the services available was "wholesale common carrier
services." The supporting commissioners were deregulatory Republicans
FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate, who
praised the outcome, saying: "Promoting broadband deployment is one
of the highest priorities of the FCC. To accomplish this goal, the
Commission seeks to establish a policy environment that facilitates
and encourages broadband investment, allowing market forces to
deliver the benefits of broadband to consumers. Today, we take
another step in establishing a regulatory environment that encourages
such investments and innovation." Commissioners Michael Copps and
Jonathan Adelstein were not pleased with either the outcome or the
process that produced. Copps put his problems with the latter this
way: "As a legal matter this approach is suspect. There is no
appealable Order. There is no document, no stitch of analysis, no
trace of discussion, nothing that a court can use to gauge where the
Commission is coming from. And by failing to act through a normal
proceeding, the Commission jeopardizes many Congressional policies
that are at the core of its statutory duties. I find no basis to
support an approach that puts so much at risk."
<http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6317345?display=Breaking
+News>
* FCC Press Release
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264436A1.doc
* Joint Statement Martin & Tate:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264436A2.doc
* Copps Statement:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264436A3.doc
* Adelstein Statement:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-264436A4.doc
Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/