The $3 Bogey


Verizon, like other Baby Bells is beginning to charge about $2.87 per high speed Internet connection and will be passing it on to the Universal Service Fund, reports the New York Times. USF, subsidizes the services in rural and lesser developed regions. USF, is a nice subsidy and should continue in some form or the other – but only for phone service, not for the high speed internet connections. Since most of the rural carriers are either not providing or charging huge amount of money for the high speed data connections, it is no point subsidizing them. This is an area which needs clarity, something the “boob covering, Stern Bashing FCC” has failed to give. The politicians have anyway turned this issue into a hair-ball the size of Shaq O Neal’s ego.

My personal opinion: And in reality why should the urban users pay a subsidy. High speed internet is a lucrative business, and many municipalities and rural areas have shown that they can figure out a way to figure out a better deal for themselves.



I believe urban users have to subsidise the rural community. This has precedent in the form of the lineage of the USF for basic services. Of course, for VoIP it is a non-issue.


These fees piss me off to no end….

Like SBC they claim this is a “regulatory recovery” fee, but there’s nothing to recover. They were already paying into the USF, it didn’t increase, and even Verizon admits that some of the new fee simply goes toward business expenses…..

They fail to include these fees above the line where they belong, it’s simply a way of raising rates and then blaming it on Uncle Sam. They’re like pouty spoiled brats. Deregulation? Lions are caged for a reason….

I’d expect a law against these “fees that aren’t fees” soon if our lawmakers have any credibility left….

Glenn Fleishman

Actually, this is like the Microsoft settlement proposed by them in California. If the telcos can put money in the fund that they charge their urban users, they can try to control the process of build-out under their supervision and ownership in rural areas.

Comments are closed.