I see that the trial of Enron magnates “Kenny Boy” Lay (as George W. liked to call him) and Jeff Skilling begins today. It occurs to me that with some luck, greedy corporate executives, and ineffectual government oversight, we could be hosting our own trial. Only, instead of a trial of post-deregulation energy company executives, it would be a trial of post-deregulation telecommunications company executives.
If the legislature passes SB 245 maybe we can grab some headlines with telecomm execs who engage in post-regulatory excesses. Instead of electric bills in California, we might be seeing Grandma Millie taken to the cleaners over her telephone bills.
(Just a refresher on the Enron-Grandma Millie angle — from some recorded conversations between two Enron employees concerning California’s deregulated energy market:
Employee 1: “All the money you guys stole from those poor grandmothers in California?
Employee 2: “Yeah, Grandma Millie man.
Employee 1: “Yeah, now she wants her f—–g money back for all the power you’ve charged right up, jammed right up her a—for f—–g $250 a megawatt hour.”
Some other choice quotes in that story:
One trader is heard on tapes obtained by CBS News saying, “Just cut ’em off. They’re so f—-d. They should just bring back f—–g horses and carriages, f—–g lamps, f—–g kerosene lamps.”
And when describing his reaction when a business owner complained about high energy prices, another trader is heard on tape saying, “I just looked at him. I said, ‘Move.’ (laughter) The guy was like horrified. I go, ‘Look, don’t take it the wrong way. Move. It isn’t getting fixed anytime soon.”
Of course, I’m just speculating about potential abuses if Indiana’s telephone companies are deregulated. Like I said, corporate executives would have to be greedy and government oversight would have to be ineffective. What are the odds of that happening?
That’s why I use Vonage for phone service. The phone companies irratate me more than any other type of corporation. My concern now is broadband. One, my own rates. Two, access to most of my family that lives in less populated areas. I don’t know how to compel the phone or cable companies to give broadband to everyone, but I think that should be the goal. Then let people choose to get phone from the phone company, cable company (only SLIGHTLY less sinky than the phone company), the power company, or some other vendor like Vonage or Skype.
If they ever try to change USF (Universal Service Fee) on my VoIP line, there had better be Universal Service. If my mom can’t get broadband, then I’m not going to pay USF just so a school can get an extra gigabit link to the Internet.
Quick background on USF. It is on your standard phone bill (around $9-10 per month) so that everyone could have dialtone, even those in remote areas. The problem came when every HAD dialtone, should they get rid of the fee? No, they decided to give that USF money to E-RATE, a program to give Internet access to schools. Also a noble idea when it was started. However, now that every school has good Internet access, E-RATE has expanded to many types of perks that are just plain wasteful. I have seen (an participated, sadly) in the WASTE of E-RATE money. The general thought it that since it is all going to be spent on schools every year anyhow, my school should try to get its share. Even if there is no need, why turn down “free” money?
There is a great oppertunity to redirect this money to provide Universal Broadband, but I don’t think anyone in the statehouse wants to be labeled as the person who took money from schools.
That reminds me of a story I heard on NPR (‘Market Place’ I think.) Apparently there is a tax on your phone bill originally put in place to pay for the Spanish American War in 1898.
FYI, for those as anal as me about USF, feel free to see where your money is going:
http://www.universalservice.org/about/universal-service/fund-facts.aspx
Over $7.1 billion in 2005. Most goes back to the phone company for dialtone in remote areas, the next big chunk goes to schools. There are two other programs that I was unaware of, the “Low-income” and “Rural Health Care” programs. Both seem worthwhile, and by looking at the numbers, they both *seem* to be ran well. My proposal would be do divert over 1/2 of the money going to schools and put it to broadband in remote areas.