Telecommuting |
 |
by Bill Wood |
Last fall and winter the Internet wires were hot with protest messages regarding the proposal by the FCC to impose a "modem tax." It was intended to be a surcharge that would have imposed a per minute levy on Internet use. That concept met with widespread opposition. This month I will examine what we received instead.
The rule adopted by the FCC on May 7, 1997, imposes a flat monthly charge on additional phone lines. Those fees should total about $1.50 per month per additional line for residential service. Businesses may pay more. Estimates for the increase in the mon thly per line fee for multiple-line business connections range from forty cents per month to as high as $4.12. The charge for the first line in each case will not change.
It is part of a much larger action that is supposed to save consumers money on long distance charges. Although the long distance companies are not required to pass on the savings, AT&T for one has committed to do so. The plan lowers the fee long-distance companies pay for connections to the local telephone service provider. Of course those fees are then factored into the charges customers pay for long-distance phone service.
CNN estimated that the access fee payments total $23 billion per year and the change will lower that figure by $1.7 billion. It is easy to see that large sums of money are involved. If the long-distance providers pass along the savings, the long-distance consumer wins. Consequently, the changes were hailed as a rate reduction.
But, if your long-distance bill is small or if you are a business with lots of connections but little long-distance usage, you will pay more. One estimate is that one-third of the customers will see bills that will be higher or unchanged. The rest will r eceive smaller monthly bills-an average of $2.00 per month.
The money raised by the fee increase on multiple lines goes to the government. It is estimated that between $2 billion and $3 billion will be collected. So where is that money going?
Last year the Congress and the administration worked out the huge Telecommunications Act of 1996. That was the law that will change local phone service as we've known it for many years. One other part [Section 502] of that bill, the Communications Decenc y Act, has also been the subject of much debate. The validity of that portion of the law is currently under review by the United States Supreme Court. But not so widely discussed was the provision that money be raised to provide low-cost technology and I nternet service to schools, libraries and social service agencies. This is supposed to be the source of those funds.
At the time, FCC Chairman Reed Hundt said: "The recommendation asks the FCC to create a federal-state, country-county, public-private partnership. Schools and libraries will pay something for communications technology, but the telecommunications companie s will together meet them more than halfway in finding these partnerships.
By providing discounts on all telecommunications services, on internal wiring, as well as on Internet access, the bipartisan Joint Board on Universal Service has shown its dedication to ensuring schools get the full spectrum of tools they need.
Discounts will also be provided for the first time to rural health-care providers, so that they can use modem telecommunication services to provide their patients with better, faster, more efficient care."
Just a couple of side notes. The San Antonio Public library has had public Internet terminals available for more than a year.
Also, it is ironic that the FCC vote to impose the fees came the same week I received an invitation from Marty Knight, a prune mover in the Internet Odyssey group, to volunteer in an effort to wire the Martin Luther King Middle School for Internet access . This is just one of several local groups that have taken action and not waited for the government to do it.
Public Comments Invited on Proposal For Personal Privacy Policy
Is a new federal agency needed to focus on Personal Privacy? The topic of formulating a national policy on personal privacy in the electronic age is open for discussion. Vice President Gore and the National Information Infrastructure Task Force have requ ested public comment on the recently released document, Options for Promoting Privacy on the National Information Infrastructure.
As the report notes, "[a]s a practical matter, individuals cannot participate fully in society without revealing vast amounts of personal data."
The 67 page document explores the issue from several perspectives including an examination of the criminal statutes that apply to electronic transmission and disclosure of certain information to the almost total lack of control on the sharing of personal data.
The topic is developed in four areas:
The basic report can be found at and comments should be submitted to the Privacy Working Group before the end of June. E-mail can be sent to the Chair, Jerry Gates at ggates@info.census.gov.legislative/Update.
HB1300, which was introduced by Frank Corte the local State Representative, is now in a conference committee because the House and Senate passed different versions.
As noted in prior articles, this bill requires anyone that provides Internet access in Texas to provide at least trial versions of blocking software that can limit children's access to objectionable material. During the legislative process the proposed maximum fine has been raised to $60,000.
Also, the Attorney General has been authorized to initiate action to enforce the provisions.
I suspect the House and Senate will compromise and that it will probably be signed by the Governor by the time this issue of PC Alamode is mailed.
I'll try to keep the web page up to date.
HB984 is still alive. That is the bill that would recognize digital signatures in Texas for commercial and governmental purposes. It is in the Senate Jurisprudence Committee and may be reported out the week of May 12th.
William Wood is a licensed attorney on the San Antonio City Attorney's staff. He practices real estate, municipal and technology law for the City of San Antonio. These articles are only intended as a general introduction to various legal issues involved in the use of computers and technology. They are not specific legal advice and anyone with a question should seek advice of an attorney skilled in technology law.
Reprint from PC Alamode, The News Magazine of the Alamo PC Organization.
E-mail me at webmaster@hal-pc.org with any comments you have and tell me what you want to see here.
Back to the Magazine Home Page