| Teletruth petitions the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) to prove the need for the FCC Line Charge (Federal Subscriber
Line Charge, or "SLC" charge) imposed on every residential
and business wireline telecommunications monthly phone bill (per
line). Failing such proof, TeleTruth requests that the Commission
suspend current itemized line charges, including any proposed
and planned increases, until a full accounting to the public is
made. This challenge is based on TeleTruth's analysis and conclusions
that the basis for the imposition of such charges are seriously
flawed, unduly selective, and based on biased statistical analysis.
As we will demonstrate, the data that has been used in the
calculations for the FCC Line Charge, including the phone company
supplied data, the models presented to justify the charge, and
the FCC's unjustified inclination to accept such data uncritically
from such interested parties in meetings not open to the public
are by their very nature the definition of regulatory capture
by industry interests. We therefore are left with no other option
but to conclude that both the data and the decisions that have
resulted from the use of such data are biased in the extreme.
The public deserves a more open process and a regulatory body
more respectful of their duties and responsibilities under the
Data Quality Act. TeleTruth maintains that only through a more
open and fair process can such charges be investigated and justified
to consumers.
|
"The FCC Line
Charge, which is on every wireline residential and
business phone bill, 1) does not go to fund the FCC as is the
common belief. 2) It is not part of 'Basic' service, even though
many state phone bills says it is. 3) It's not a tax, even though
it's in the 'Surcharges and Taxes' section of the NY Verizon bill,
among other states, and 4) it is quintuple taxed in New York City
adding 27% to the cost. 5) It is unmarked revenue of billions
of dollars back to the phone companies that is 6) not mandated
by the FCC. 7) It is not controlled by the state commission even
though Verizon New Jersey said it is. 8) There's been no cost
analysis of why it should be on the bill, even though 9) it has
continually increased over the last three years - 86% even though
10) Verizon stated publicly that local phone service hasn't increased
in 11 years in New York and 20 years in New Jersey. And 11) the
advertised price for a 'package' does not include this charge.
12) To top it off, there was some study done in 1998 that it was
already inflated 550% and yet 13) the FCC is now entertaining
plans to raise it to $9.00 a month in 2004." (From:The
Dirty, Little, Secret Lives Of Phone Bills) |
|
To
Read Related Materials:
- The Data Quality Act,
- FCC Guidelines for the Data Quality Act,
- The Office of Management and Budget,
- Tther related documents.
|
Phone Bill Campaign Yields
Class Action Suit Settlement With Verizon New Jersey
Read
the Star Ledger Article
....."This is just the tip of the iceberg," said
Tom Allibone, director ofauditing for Teletruth, a consumer
advocacy group that assisted the
plaintiffs in the case. "This is a simple example of
how their billing system doesn't work."
|
