A new Senate bill proposing changes to the...

the bill before the Thanksgiving recess, prompting praise from FairPoint in a statement last week (CD Dec 2 p10). The bill would make sure that rural states keep at least 75 cents for every dollar of USF contribution. Ramsay said the states that would be benefit are the rural ones that are net donors to the USF, but the states that are not designated as rural -- which the bill defines as ones in which “the total population density is not more than 200 people per square mile” -- will have to pay the difference, whether they are net donors or recipients to the USF. Most states -- 35 -- have fewer than 200 people per square mile, according to the 2010 census. Ramsay doubted it would be “politically palatable to come up with differing [USF] surcharges for different states,” leading him to speculate that there might be a hike in surcharges across the board if such a bill is passed. But an aide to Ayotte last week told us the bill would not increase the size of the USF, and the bill text contains language specifying that nothing should be construed as “requiring an increase in amounts collected by providers of interstate telecommunications from consumers for the purpose of making contributions.” Ramsay noted this language and suggested the FCC might only be able to make changes on the allocation of USF funds rather than the collection, which would still mean that non-rural states fund the difference. He questioned how the FCC would actually implement the language, saying that’s open to various possibilities.