FL: Cable Bill Supported by Groups Getting Telco Money

The Florida Video Franchise Bill was signed into law by Gov. Crist on Friday May 19th.

from: St. Petersburg Times [1]

Florida Cable Bill Supported by Groups Getting Telco Money

May 18, 2007

My friend Mike Twomey, a Tallahassee lawyer who frequently represents customers in cases against Florida utility companies, writes to argue that the advantages of the cable-TV bill (House Bill 529, the subject of my print column today) outweigh the disadvantages. Specifically, he points out the bill gets rid of the last round of those local telephone rate increases, while increasing access to the Lifeline program that provides phone service to those who need a little help.

Twomey writes:

AARP, the single largest consumer organization in the state to my knowledge with 2.8 million members, and the NAACP have written letters to Crist urging him to sign HB 529, the former’s support based mostly on the fact that the bill will wipe out the last round of local phone rate increases, which is worth roughly $157 million to consumers on a recurring basis. I don’t see that you mention the rate increase issue at all. The bill gets vetoed, your readers see an almost immediate increase in their local phone bills. The increases will effectively be permanent.

Here are the two letters: [Download NAACP.doc ] [Download AARP.doc ]

Comments

Let’s get real. Both the NAACP and AARP have received huge amounts of money from the telecom industry in the recent past. In February, in fact, the Verizon Foundation gave the NAACP $15 million of its own money plus $4 million in in-kind from other companies to help NAACP update its technology. AARP’s taken money from Verizon, too, and both AARP and the NAACP have picked up a bundle from AT&T. Anyone think the groups’ endorsements had anything to do with the money they got? Anyone out there wonder why they didn’t disclose receiving those monies in the letters they wrote to the Governor endorsing the bill? I’m about ready to cancel my memberships in both groups inasmuch as the bill will silence minority and senior voices on public access television. Gosh, I guess AARP and the NAACP didn’t notice they’d be cutting off their own constituents, huh?

Posted by: | May 15, 2007 at 05:18 PM

I’m appalled at this comment!! I’m a consumer and there is no way I would support this bill! Any educated person would know that nothing in this bill is consumer-friendly. Anyone who says it is is involved in the propaganda of the cable companies, and you know who you are AARP and NAACP. You don’t fool me!

Posted by: Toni | May 15, 2007 at 05:40 PM

I’m outraged that the AARP and the NAACP would support this God Awful bill!! It makes me wonder just how these groups are run. I vehemently oppose this bill! Please consumers beware! They are trying to pull one over on you! Do not support HB529! It’s a corporate scam!

Posted by: Dominic | May 15, 2007 at 05:57 PM

see: http://fcan.blogspot.com/2007/05/consumer-groups-oppose-cable-bill.html

Florida Consumer Action Network
Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Consumer Groups Oppose Cable Bill

FCAN joined Florida Pirg, Consumer Federation of the Southeast, Consumer Federation of America, FreePress, ACORN, and Consumer’s Union is opposing the Cable Bill H 529. In a letter, FCAN and the other groups called on Governor Charlie Crist to veto the bill.

The consumer groups make these points:

A new video franchising framework must include stronger build-out requirements and consumer protections:

Without build-out requirements, this bill cements the digital divide by statute. Because the legislation does not require new cable providers operating under a statewide franchise to serve all consumers within a franchise area, new entrants will be free to offer service to only wealthy neighborhoods, leaving behind middle and low-income consumers who most need cable rate relief.

Anti-redlining provisions are insufficient to ensure low and middle income consumers are not left behind. Although Gov. Crist worked to insert an anti-discrimination provision, this provision alone will not guarantee that new communications technologies will be offered throughout the state to traditionally under-served communities. The legislation appropriately prohibits redlining based on race and income.

Unfortunately, in the absence of build out requirements this anti-redlining provision, on its own, will be not be sufficient to ensure low-income areas will be served by new video providers.

A new franchising process must sustain and support the continued viability of valuable local public services such as public access television, institutional networks, and consumer protection: We must not shortchange local communities with a state franchising process that undercuts the services that local governments have long secured for their citizens. In particular, public access to cable channels has long provided a voice for citizens, local cultural fare, and coverage of local government activities. These services should be supported, not curtailed.

Network neutrality should be a central component of any pro-competitive broadband policy in the state: The federal government has debated this critical policy and failed to come to a resolution. It is now left to the states to protect consumers and innovation. The issue of network neutrality is about who will control the Internet — consumers and producers in a competitive marketplace, or network owners in a non-competitive marketplace.

There are other issues, so I encourage those interested to read the entire letter here. Also, check out Howard Troxler’s excellent column.

Write or email Gov Crist at:

Charlie.Crist@myflorida.com

Office of Governor Charlie Crist
State of Florida
PL-05 The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001

(850) 488-7146 PHONE
(850) 487-0801 FAX

Posted by: | May 15, 2007 at 10:59 PM

The press release that all of the consumer groups — who typically work on these issues — released speaks directly to the issue Mr. Twomey raises.

This is a shell game for AT&T — they’re just moving the money around. This will cap the rate increases but it will also keep long distance rates from coming down.

They also point out that an enormous percentage of Floridians still use long distance lines.

So, this rate increase really isn’t a big boon to consumers, it’s no sweat off AT&T’s back and in my opinion it’s a non-issue that doesn’t even belong in this bill.

Posted by: Dan | May 17, 2007 at 03:53 PM