[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 77 (Thursday, May 22, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1052]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. MIKE ROGERS

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 22, 2003

  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today to 
highlight the benefits that competition in the telecommunications 
industry has bestowed upon this nation.
  In the seven years since the passage of the Telecommunications Act, 
millions of consumers and thousands of businesses have been given 
choices and enjoyed savings never before experienced during more than a 
century of monopoly control. In fact, it is estimated that if telecom 
competition were allowed to flourish across the nation, our citizens 
could save more than $9 billion a year on their telephone bills.
  Take, for example, LDMI Telecommunications, a competitive telecom 
provider who offers services in Michigan. LDMI's President & CEO, 
Patrick O'Leary, has files full of letters from customers who are 
grateful to have a choice among providers and are able to save a 
significant amount of money in the process.
  Here's what some of LDMI's customers have to say:

       ``When long distance was a monopoly we could only afford 
     five inside sales reps due to the high cost of phone calls. 
     Thanks to the lowest phone rates we've ever enjoyed, we now 
     have sixteen inside sales reps and our market is now the 
     continental United States. Our sales are over five million 
     dollars. None of this growth would have been possible without 
     competition in the telecommunications industry.''--a supplier 
     of paper rolls for business machines in New Hudson, Michigan
       ``Since we became an LDMI customer in August, 1994, we have 
     enjoyed not only excellent rates and saving, but have also 
     experienced extremely courteous and overly competent customer 
     service and technical support. To say that we are satisfied 
     with the high quality of service and incredible savings would 
     have to be considered an understatement.''--a law firm in 
     Saginaw, Michigan

  These reactions are extremely common among the millions of customers 
who are relying on competitive telecommunications providers for their 
voice and data communications services. LDMI, and many other small 
competitive companies who offer the same quality and cost-effective 
services to consumers and small businesses, would not exist but for the 
rules that require the Bell companies to provide competitors access to 
the public switched telephone network at reasonable, non-discriminatory 
rates.
  Telecom competition serves as an economic catalyst, as well. As you 
can see from these customer testimonials, consumers and business owners 
have a great incentive to re-invest the savings on their telephone 
bills into new equipment or services. Moreover, the economy is 
bolstered by the spending of competitors and the Bell companies 
themselves on new technology, new networks, and innovative service 
packages. In fact, studies show that since passage of the 1996 Act, 
alternative telecom service providers have generated more than $100 
billion in capital expenditures on state-of-the art infrastructure, 
while the Bells have accounted for another $50 billion in spending as a 
direct result of competition in their markets.
  We must work to ensure that consumer benefits and economic stimulus 
are not stifled by government actions over voice and broadband 
services. The FCC is poised to issue an order that would preserve 
competition through the use of the Unbundled Network Element Platform--
or UNE-P. The Commission should be thorough in its consideration of the 
details of the rules it is about to issue to ensure that competition 
remains viable, consumer choice is protected and technological 
innovation is allowed to blossom.

                          ____________________