37 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Copyright © 2018 E. William Horne. All Rights Reserved.

The Telecom Digest for Fri, 21 Sep 2018
Volume 37 : Issue 225 : "text" format

Table of contents
Re: Universal Service FundHAncock4
Switching cell carriers not always easyBill Horne
Robocalls getting worseHAncock4
Please send posts to telecom-digest.org, with userid set to telecomdigestsubmissions, or via Usenet to comp.dcom.telecom
The Telecom Digest is made possible by generous supporters like John Lewandowski
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <20babcbc-0c7d-4709-bfe3-0e7dce85f941@googlegroups.com> Date: 20 Sep 2018 16:15:07 -0700 From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> Subject: Re: Universal Service Fund On Wednesday, September 19, 2018 at 10:11:17 PM UTC-4, Bill Horne wrote: > The Universal Service Fund (USF) is a system of telecommunications > subsidies and fees managed by the United States Federal Communications > Commission (FCC) intended to promote universal access to > telecommunications services in the United States. The FCC established > the fund in 1997 in compliance with the Telecommunications Act of > 1996. The FCC is a government agency that implements and enforces > America's communication regulations in all 50 states, the District of > Columbia, and other U.S. territories. The fund reported a total of > $7.82 billion in disbursements in 2014, divided among its four > programs. The fund is supported by charging telecommunications > companies a fee which is set quarterly. As of the third quarter of > 2016, the rate is 17.9% of a telecom company's interstate and > international end-user revenues. > > While separate itemization is not required by the FCC, it is common > for USF fees to be listed separately from other charges on a > consumer's bill. Universal Service charges should not be confused with > what are sometimes referred to in telephone company bills as "Federal > Subscriber Line" charges, which are access fees charged by > telecommunications companies, not the local or federal government. > > http://www.popflock.com/learn?s=Universal_Service_Fund In the old days, universal service was a major goal of state and federal utility regulators. They achieved it by setting basic service rates very low (bare bones was $3/month*) while premium service rates were set higher as a cross subsidy. One of the objectives of the Bell breakup was to eliminate that cross-subsidy so that business and LD rates would go down and big businesses would save money (which is what happened). Local customers promptly saw rate increases and a new universal service charge, so they had no net gain from Divestiture. *That $3 included a telephone set, all maintenance for the set as well as inside and outside wiring, and interconnection to long distance. By the way, in my area there is a 911 "fee" added to my phone bill. In the old days, the phone company was proud to have the local Operator assist in placing and completing emergency calls pubic safety units. https://books.google.com/books?id=I1QEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA5&dq=life%20bell%20telephone%20emergency&pg=PA5#v=onepage&q&f=false
The Telecom Digest would not be possible without the generous support of the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at MIT
------------------------------ Message-ID: <20180921020911.GA32462@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 22:09:11 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: Switching cell carriers not always easy By Eric Cullin I am writing in response to the editorial board's article "Let Verizon fix its own business" published on Sept. 18 in response to the article "Officials eye solutions over continued Verizon signal headache" published on Sept. 17. I must say this editorial is shortsighted, misinformed, and wrong. https://www.thetimesherald.com/story/opinion/readers/2018/09/20/switching-cell-carriers-always-easy/37872685/ -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly)
The Telecom Digest depends on generous supporters like John Levine
------------------------------ Message-ID: <ad04eec9-1d60-4d1c-92b5-b36cb0267cb8@googlegroups.com> Date: 20 Sep 2018 16:20:51 -0700 From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> Subject: Robocalls getting worse CBS News reported that some 30 billion spam calls were made in the U.S. last year. This year, that number is expected to climb by more than 10 billion. The robocall blocking company YouMail, said the most alarming part is the number of spam calls that are actually scams. Of the 4 billion robocalls made in August, nearly 1.8 billion of them were fraudulent. Next year, some estimates predict half of all mobile calls will be scams. (CBS played a fake call claiming to be the IRS. I just got that call the other day on my cell phone). Not mentioned was that many cell phone users are pay-as- you-go, and they must pay for every incoming call. It is illegal to send any soliciting call to a cell phone, but that law is obviously ignored and not enforced. (I had a relative in a nursing home who was bombarded by soliciting calls to the extent we had to pull the phone. That such calls were illegal didn't stop them.) full CBS article at https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-to-stop-robocalls-those-annoying-automated-phone-calls-are-about-to-get-worse/ see also: https://www.cbsnews.com/video/annoying-robocalls-expected-to-get-worse/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/robocall-sharp-rise-is-government-doing-enough/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/robocalls-getting-worse-atlanta-dallas-miami-top-targets/
The Telecom Digest depends on generous supporters like John Lewandowski
------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Fri, 21 Sep 2018

Telecom Digest Archives