[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 17]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 24293]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 24293]]

           REST OF THE TRUTH IN TELEPHONE BILLING ACT OF 1999

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY

                            of massachusetts

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, October 5, 1999

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the ``Rest of the Truth 
in Telephone Billing Act of 1999.'' The title of the bill reflects the 
fact that some of the ``truth in telephone billing'' has already been 
proposed in a bill by two of my esteemed Commerce Committee colleagues, 
Chairman Bliley and Telecommunications Subcommittee Tauzin. I offer the 
``rest of the truth'' to point out that a listing of fees and taxes 
only provides half the story. The other half of the story is the 
subsidies in the telecommunications marketplace, which I believe need 
to be made just as explicit on a consumer's bill as the fees and taxes 
in order to fully inform consumers of what they do and do not pay for 
when they subscribe to telecommunications services.
  Mr. Speaker, the telecommunications marketplace is rife with such 
subsidies. Many of these subsidies are quite noble in intention and 
help to pay for affordable telecommunications service for the poor and 
for rural consumers. Yet many of these subsidies reflect a historic 
monopoly marketplace and should be revisited as the marketplace 
changes. For instance, some of these subsidies may still be needed and 
there are some which ought to be adjusted (or even eliminated) to 
reflect a more competitive marketplace.
  The ``truth,'' Mr. Speaker, is that many consumers in America today 
pay too much to support a bloated subsidy system that was designed to 
support inefficient monopoly-provided service. As efficiencies arrive 
in the marketplace due to technological changes and the competitive 
entry of new providers, I believe that many subsidized services could 
be provided at lower cost, and therefore less subsidy, than previously 
provided.
  Providing subsidies sufficient to keep costs low in rural America and 
for the inner city poor, or to hook up schools and libraries, ought to 
be done in a manner that reflects the actual costs of providing the 
service. In order to ensure that we give consumers the rest of the 
truth in telephone billing, I suggest in the legislative proposal I am 
offering today, that we insist that both the fees and taxes AND the 
subsidies be made explicit for consumers and listed on their bills.
  I suggest that we give consumers the full story. Consumers should 
know when they're paying $8 in fees or $18 in taxes. They should also 
know whether they're simultaneously receiving (or paying) a hitherto 
implicit subsidy to the tune of $2 or $200. I look forward to working 
with Chairman Bliley and Chairman Tauzin on their legislative proposal 
and to discussions with our other colleagues--both urban and rural--on 
how we can better ascertain the true costs, true taxes, true fees, and 
the true subsidies embedded in the telecommunications bills that 
consumers pay monthly.

                          ____________________