State telecom deregulation will continue and may not...

since Indiana’s 2006 deregulation bill, as well as the bills pending in 2013, that deregulation will continue, either individually, state by state, or via FCC forbearance,” the 72-page paper said. It’s an update to a survey of legislation she released last summer. Lichtenberg described the legislative survey results and conclusions of this research to us earlier this spring, saying she worries less about deregulation these days (CD March 29 p13). Such deregulation bills have passed or are pending in 70 percent of states, the paper said. The research examines the wave of recent laws and pending bills, such as those limiting state regulation of Internet Protocol-enabled services (CD April 1 p7). It analyzes which telcos are dominant in areas where regulation is being or has been reduced. “Legislation passed or pending in the 22 states where AT&T is the primary ILEC could almost totally eliminate state utility commission oversight of retail telecommunications across the AT&T region,” Lichtenberg’s paper argued. “As the largest carrier in these regions, AT&T has moved aggressively to encourage state legislatures to deregulate both traditional wireline and emerging VoIP and IP-enabled services throughout the territory. AT&T’s key legislative goals appear to be protecting VoIP and ‘emerging IP-enabled services’ from regulation and eliminating the [carrier of last resort] COLR and/or basic service obligations not shared by its more lightly regulated competitors.” Verizon is “least active” in sponsoring these deregulation efforts in its 13-state ILEC area, Lichtenberg said: “Rather than push for deregulation, Verizon appears to have focused its efforts on increasing the penetration of FiOS where it is already available, addressing the damage caused by Hurricane Sandy, resolving quality-of-service issues raised by the failure of the 911 system during the 2012 Derecho, and responding to questions about service quality raised in New York and California.” The paper confirms what Lichtenberg told us about the effects of state deregulation: “The early results seem, if not positive, then at least ‘palatable.’ Carriers have not withdrawn service from their traditional markets, including their rural markets. ILECs have not raised prices significantly or eliminated traditional TDM wireline service offerings.” And PUCs and consumers are adjusting, she said. She proposed strategies for these stakeholders, suggesting state regulators work with other agencies to fill in gaps in oversight where regulatory power has been removed or reduced. Lichtenberg is scheduled to present her research Wednesday morning at a USTelecom event on state telecom policy.