The FCC's Rapidly Revolving Door

Stanl writes "A former Federal Communications Commission bureau chief who played an integral role in shaping policies governing local telephone competition is now a senior vice president for federal regulatory strategy for SBC Communications, helping the telecom giant rewrite the rules she helped draft. The former chief of the FCC's Wireline Competition Bureau quit the agency on Sept. 15 of last year and began work at SBC Nov. 1, the Center For Public Integrity says. Here is the report."

Comments

How shocking !

[fini]

Really shocking!

There would be suspicions of collusion between federal authorities and corporate interests in this country.

Unbelievable !

But I am fully confident that our elected leaders will know how to address those issues.

Re:How shocking !

[rgmoore]

But I am fully confident that our elected leaders will know how to address those issues.

Yes, they've clearly shown that they know how to address this issue: they allow the practice to continue so that there will be lucrative job offers available in case they don't win the next election. You didn't really expect them to close down what amounts to a full employment program for out of work politicians, did you?

SBC isn't pure

[drokus]

SBC is a money hungry corp for sure. Everything they do is to benefit themselves. But, I don't believe any company should be forced to sell products or services to the competetion for less than it cost them to provide. No matter what business they are in.

Re:SBC isn't pure

[Anonymous Coward]

The question is less what SBC should be forced to sell than what the consumer should be forced to buy.

SBC has cannot manage the publicly owned wires. It is institutionally retarded, like the Chinese justice system. Talk to someone who works there. Look up the story of the dentist in San Antonio who noticed that SBC was getting rid of their pay phones all over town because "they weren't profitable" and started buying them up . . . he runs hundreds of pay phones with 1/10th the number of employees (and they cost on 25 cents instead of 50).

I wish there were a way I could block all SBC numbers from calling me. SBC has largely destroyed the idea of a national phone system; if I buy a nationwide pre-paid cell phone from AT&T, it doesn't work in many areas covered by SBC. I don't want to be part of any system they work with. I would very much like to see all SBC employees shaking cups on street corners and all SBC company officiers hanging from street lights.

Because of SBC, in Texas the minimum monthly cost of a local line is $22.99 a month (not from SBC of course) with the usual $9 or $10 of fraudulently labled "taxes" (oh, you thought that 911 connection fee and universal service charge went to the government ?) tacked on. In Massachusetts a local line can be had for $11 a month, and that's in an area where snow, ice, and tree branches actually mess up the lines now and then.

SBC overchanged Texans by $870 million last year. That's just Texas. Look at this report, page 75 of the pdf (60 of the document itself):

http://www.puc.state.tx.us/telecomm/reports/scope/ index.cfm

I have a relative who can't afford a telephone because this shit is allowed to go on. I'm paying too much to go with AT&T as a local line, it's better than SBC but even they lied about what my monthly bill would be. SBC and cronies are worse than Ebbers and Skilling/Lay, and should be killed along with those guys.

Re:SBC isn't pure

[namespan]

Look up the story of the dentist in San Antonio who noticed that SBC was getting rid of their pay phones all over town because "they weren't profitable" and started buying them up . . . he runs hundreds of pay phones with 1/10th the number of employees (and they cost on 25 cents instead of 50).

Just google'd for this story using the terms "San Antonio pay|public phones dentist" and I'm not coming up with anything that looks promising. Any hints? (Newspaper, date range, other key words)?