STATE BILLS WOULD AFFECT PSC POWERS, EXPAND NO-CALL LISTS

Some N.M. state lawmakers say they intend to introduce measure to trim powers of N.M. Public Regulation Commission (PRC) and restructure it into appointed body because agency has usurped authority of legislature. Legislature convenes 2003 session today (Jan. 21) and state Rep. Ted Hobbs (R- Albuquerque) said he would introduce bill to require that PRC members be appointed by governor and confirmed by Senate rather than be elected. His draft bill also would remove insurance, pipelines and ambulance services from PRC’s jurisdiction. Hobbs said measure would reflect recommendations made by interim legislative committee that last year studied PRC functions. He said making agency into appointed body would ensure members had proper qualifications to handle complex regulatory issues. Other lawmakers vowed to trim PRC’s authority in energy regulation, citing PRC attempts last year to make major changes in energy tax credit program passed by legislature that was intended to encourage utility investment in solar and wind power. Whatever changes legislature may pass this year wouldn’t take effect for at least 2 years. Since PRC is constitutional, not statutory, agency, any major changes in its jurisdiction or operations would require approval by state’s voters in 2004 election.

Regulatory bill in Mich. Senate (SB-1) would require that SBC and Verizon seek PSC approval to continue intrastate subscriber line charge (SLC) that would allow PSC to prohibit that SLC if it wasn’t justified by cost. Carriers would have to come to PSC within 90 days of measure’s effective date. Bill is legislature’s response to situation that began with passage of Mich. Telecom Act of 2000, which prohibited state SLCs. SBC and Verizon challenged provision in federal court on constitutional grounds and won stay of ban. Settlement that carriers negotiated last fall with administration of then Gov. John Engler (R) produced small reductions in SLC, with SBC’s charge cut to $2.78 monthly from $3.28 and Verizon’s to $3.25 from $3.50, effective with March bills. New Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D), who was state attorney gen. when deals were negotiated, had opposed them as disservice to consumers and state’s lawmakers. Under bill, state SLC couldn’t exceed federal SLC. Bill backers believe that by requiring PSC review of state SLC and authorizing agency to abolish fee if unjustified, state could get around carriers’ court claim that law denied them their constitutional right to due process.

Kan. House Utilities Committee plans hearings today (Jan. 21) on regulatory measure that would totally deregulate high-speed Internet access and all other broadband telecom services. Bill (HB-2019) is similar to one introduced last week in Mo. It would prohibit Kan. Corp. Commission from regulating broadband services in any way and from imposing any network unbundling requirements beyond those prescribed by FCC. SBC said it supported Kan. bill, as it had endorsed Mo. measure. It said bill would clear way for it to invest in Kan. broadband infrastructure. But opponents said it would hamper competitors because SBC could deny any rival requests that exceeded minimum requirements prescribed by FCC.

Ind. regulatory bill (HB-1314) would require Ind. Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) to consider impact on consumers of any proposed orders, even where public was being represented by state Utility Consumer Counsel. Bill also would prohibit ex parte communications between IURC and any party or govt. agency involved in particular proceeding. Any accidental or involuntary ex parte communications would have to be reported for record.

Bills in Ind., N.Y. and Conn. would expand state no-call lists. Ind. bill (HB-1294) would expand state’s list to include business phone numbers. List now is restricted to residential numbers. No-call expansion bill in N.Y. (SB-128) would expand that state’s no call list by allowing residents to put their fax numbers on list. It would ban all faxed ads to numbers on state list unless person was established customer. Bill would require fax retailers to post notice in their stores about no-fax list. Similar no-fax list bill has been introduced in Conn. (HB-5090). Another N.Y. bill (AB- 709) would expand state no-call list into no-spam list by allowing inclusion of e-mail addresses and banning unsolicited advertising e-mails to addresses on state list.

Iowa telemarketing bill (HB-9) would establish no-call telemarketing list that would include wireless as well as landline numbers. List would be administered by Secy. of State or his delegated vendor, and enforcement would be by Iowa Div. of Consumer Protection. Violations would be prosecuted as unfair trade practice, with few exemptions. Bill also would require that telemarketers that used automatic dialing devices to have live sales representative come on line within 2 sec. after call was answered. It wouldn’t affect autodialers used for purposes other than solicitation, such as employers’ using devices to contact employees. Bill also would require that sellers of prepaid calling cards provide consumer disclosures about rates per min., surcharges and expiration policy via notices posted at point of sale. Cards would have to bear toll-free customer service number and network access number and any authorization codes.

Telecom tax bills have been introduced in Maine and Cal. and will be proposed in Ky. Maine telecom tax bill (HB-36) would repeal law that imposes 0.5% tax on telecom charges to support subsidized Internet access services to public schools and libraries. It would end program funded by tax that supports Internet access, inside wiring for Internet, computers and staff training. Cal. telecom tax bill (AB-128) would extend for 4 years state law that prohibits state and local taxation of Internet access or bandwidth and any discriminatory taxation of online services or ISPs. Law now is due to expire at end of this year, but bill would move expiration to end of 2007. In Ky., Gov. Paul Patton (D) proposed new tax on telecom carriers and other business corporations to help close state’s budget gap. He proposed business activity tax that in essence would be of gross receipts tax, which he estimated would bring in $360 million annually. New tax would be in addition to existing business levies.