[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 157 (Monday, November 3, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13793-S13794]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MODERN TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, last week the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a hearing on Universal
Service, taking testimony from Michael Powell, the Chairman of the
Federal Communications Commission. I want to commend the committee for
examining issues affecting the preservation and advancement of
universal service. This is a discussion that is of great interest to me
and great importance to my State.
We have long sought to ensure that telephone service is available in
rural America, through direct infrastructure programs like those of the
Rural Utilities Service, through internal telephone company cross-
subsidies and, more recently, through the universal service fund. The
low population density in so much of our Nation makes some assistance
necessary; the costs of wiring such areas is simply too high. Phone
service is simply too important to our social fabric to ignore this
challenge. We must keep it affordable for all Americans. That is why we
need universal service.
Access to modern telecommunications services is vital to the economy
of my home State of South Dakota and in rural areas throughout the
Nation. It helps new businesses develop, even if they are far away from
their customers or clients. Telecommuting is already allowing many of
my constituents to remain in, or move back to, their home towns rather
than having to leave in search of employment. That is a trend we need
to encourage and build upon. But it is only possible if rural America
has a modern telecommunications infrastructure.
Universal service is vital to South Dakota. Yet universal service is
not just about rural America. It also supports telephone service for
low-income individuals throughout the country, and telecommunications
services and Internet access in our schools and libraries. I believe it
is important that the country remain committed to these goals and the
principle of universal service.
Despite its importance, the future of universal service is uncertain.
Some question the long-term viability of the current structure, as its
funding base of interstate telephone revenue declines. I believe that
we will need to reevaluate the universal service structure and consider
comprehensive legislation to ensure that the program remains effective
and affordable in the future. I am pleased that the Commerce Committee
has begun that process.
The committee includes the Senators who have been the most engaged on
this front. I want to commend Senator Burns for his leadership on the
issue, along with Senator Dorgan, Senator Stevens, Chairman McCain, and
Ranking Member Hollings. I look forward to working with them to keep
the universal service system strong and effective.
Senator Gordon Smith has introduced legislation that addresses an
important component of universal service, high cost funding for
nonrural carriers. Today, I am cosponsoring that legislation, S. 1380,
the Rural Universal Service Equity Act of 2003, which seeks to more
equitably distribute that portion of universal service.
Today, telephone companies in only eight States receive all of these
funds. Nonrural carriers in the rest of the country, even those in
rural States like South Dakota, receive nothing. We should reevaluate
that distribution as part of universal service reform.
I fully appreciate that S. 1380 only addresses one small, albeit
significant, portion of Universal Service. It is important to focus
attention on the need to understand and address it.
That point made, I favor reforming the high cost support program for
non-rural companies within the context of reform of the entire system.
Telephone service has developed in different ways throughout the
country, with service provided to various degrees by the Regional Bell
Operating Companies, independent phone companies, cooperatives,
wireless, and competitive carriers. We should keep that in mind when we
consider alternative approaches and look at the system as a whole, not
just focus on each individual component of universal service
separately.
When we do consider universal service legislation, I think the
approach taken by S. 1380 shifting the basis of support for nonrural
companies to costs at the wire center level, rather than statewide
costs deserves consideration as part of a broader package. Using
statewide costs makes it difficult for a company that serves a
relatively large city to obtain support for rural areas that it serves
in the same State. That can limit its ability to invest in and
modernize its rural infrastructure.
I do want to raise a specific concern about S. 1380. In reallocating
some universal service funding, the bill shifts funds around, creating
winners and losers. I am worried that this approach pits carriers and
regions against each other, rather than uniting in a common goal of
protecting universal service and the people who depend upon it for
affordable telephone service in rural and low-income communities
throughout the country. We can and should fix that problem. That is
another reason why I think the bill should be considered within the
context of broader universal service reform.
[[Page S13794]]
I want to note a special problem with one potential loser under the
bill. It shifts some funds that are currently allocated to Puerto Rico.
Puerto Rico is not represented in this body. Without an advocate of its
own to force attention to the Commonwealth's concerns, it is important
that we all carefully consider the impact legislation can have upon
Puerto Rico and its residents. When we address universal service, we
should not take steps that might inadvertently reduce the availability
and affordability of telephone and telecommunications services to the
residents of Puerto Rico.
In conclusion, I want to again thank the Commerce Committee for
focusing greater attention on the future of universal service. I look
forward to working with Senators on the committee and others concerned
about universal service for rural residents, low-income consumers and
our schools and libraries to lay the groundwork for legislation to
reform and strengthen the universal service system.
____________________