To the Editor,
I know it’s been a long time since we’ve conversed, but I read your most recent RCR Opinion piece (“Telecom reform dejà vu” in Aug. 1 issue) regarding Sen. Ensign’s legislative proposal. First, the bill totally eliminates anything in Title II (of the Act) of meaning for your readership-the wireless industry.
One of the biggest potential regulatory day-to-day cost-of-business issues for wireless providers are the interstate special-access circuits that connect their tower sites to their backbone operations (more than 95 percent of those circuits are supplied by RBOC/ILECs). The RBOCs earn excessively high rates of return on these special-access services, which has been a major regulatory issue for non-RBOC owned wireless service providers that are basically captive customers (+95 percent of their towers can only be served by RBOC/ILEC circuits).
Sen. Ensign’s bill would eliminate the progress the non-RBOC owned wireless carriers have been making at the Federal Communications Commission to bring these excessive special-access rates into line by eliminating all FCC jurisdiction over these types of matters.
Bottom line, what is good for the RBOCs may not be good for captive customer wireless service providers. Cingular Wireless and Verizon Wireless’ special-access payments largely go back to their RBOC owners and are viewed as little more than a left-pocket to right-pocket transaction.
Brian Moir
