Last week, I had the great pleasure of traveling to Southwest Virginia to participate in a cell site ground breaking ceremony. The event was held at a beautiful town hall in the rural community of Pound, Virginia. In fact, the town hall was once a school house where the current mayor - Sarah (Jackie) Gilliam - attended high school. Pound is an old coal town that sits near the Kentucky and Tennessee borders and the roughly 1,000 people that live there have never had wireless service. Enter Virginia Congressman Rick Boucher and Alltel President and CEO Scott Ford.  
 
As a member of both the House Energy and Commerce Committee and its Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Congressman Boucher has a keen sense of how mobile communications are helping to revitalize communities all over the country. So it was with that in mind that Congressman Boucher reached out to Alltel about providing wireless service to the residents of Pound, Va. The result was Monday's event,

where Congressman Boucher, Scott Ford, Wise County Supervisor Frank Luntsford, Pound Mayor Gilliam and myself joined with local leaders and residents to break ground on a new cell site that will be operational in June. In his remarks, Scott Ford mentioned how critical the USF ETC program is for projects like the one in Pound, VA. Without USF support, he said projects like this simply wouldn't be possible.
 
So to Mayor Gilliam, Supervisor Luntsford and all of the wonderful people who joined us the other day for this exciting announcement, I want to thank you for your warm hospitality and welcome you to an ever-growing wireless community. We sincerely hope that wireless service will allow the residents of Pound to enjoy safer, more productive and more prosperous lives.

Steve

State policymakers are engaging in an important debate concerning wireless governing philosophy.

To date, many state legislators and regulators have believed that adopting standards for wireless service in their state, regardless of the standards in other states, would ultimately benefit their consumers. Now, many state legislators and regulators are concluding that the national wireless framework  partly established by Congress back in 1993 has been a windfall to consumers in reducing rates while increasing the variety and use of wireless services such as voice, text and data. Rather than supporting a state by state approach to wireless consumer laws and regulations, policymakers are seeing the need and opportunity for a set of uniform national wireless standards that will consistently benefit consumers across the country. 

CTIA President & CEO Steve Largent recently spoke to the winter meeting of the National Association of Regulatory and Utility Commissioners to share his thoughts on how the wireless industry continues to respond to consumer demand, and why a comprehensive national framework makes sense. The NARUC telecommunications committee  voted to adopt a resolution supporting state enforcement of a national wireless framework, established by the FCC and enforced by state regulators. However, NARUC's board requested that the Telecommunications Committee review it further at its summer meeting in Portland, Oregon.

Also, at its fall forum, the National Conference of State Legislators (NCSL) adopted a Twenty-First Century Communications policy which urged state and federal policy makers to work together to ensure that  industry-related consumer protections can be applied within a national framework and enforced by state attorneys general.

Currently, Congress is also considering the national wireless framework. It is likely that NCSL and NAURU will play integral roles in the ultimate outcome of the federal effort.

Clearly, there are still disagreements regarding which state body should enforce national standards. However, I think these state organizations are having a  positive and critical debate. The right approach for wireless is to have a set of uniform national standards that will be consistent for consumers no matter if they are in Manhattan, New York or Manhattan, Kansas. What do you think?

I want to share a letter I sent earlier today to Mrs. Roberta Combs, the president of the Christian Coalition of America. A representative from Mrs. Combs' organization is scheduled to appear Tuesday at the House Judiciary Antitrust Task Force hearing on "'Net Neutrality" and Free Speech.

While the Christian Coalition supports net neutrality/Internet regulation, I think it's critical to consider all of the possible and likely ramifications of government mandates in this area. In that respect, the letter speaks for itself.

I am sincerely hoping that groups such as the Christian Coalition of America recognize the outstanding work the wireless industry is doing to provide parents with useful tools to control  Internet access on their families' wireless devices, as well as the steps carriers take to protect their customers from unwanted and unsolicited material such as pornography and spam, and acknowledge the negative practical implications of ill-advised net neutrality mandates.

 Yesterday I had the opportunity to appear before Chairman Ed Markey's subcommittee to talk about an important issue facing wireless consumers in America. Overall, it was a positive hearing as nearly every committee member and witness communicated a common desire and goal - to continue providing American consumers with the most cutting-edge wireless technology at the most affordable prices possible. The main focus of the hearing was to discuss Chairman Markey's draft wireless legislation and to address the question of how best to treat mobile telecommunications services from a regulatory standpoint. While the draft legislation is still a work in progress, we are very pleased that Chairman Markey has started this important discussion and we look forward to illustrating the many valuable consumer benefits that accompany a uniform set of national standards for wireless service in America. I'd also be remiss if I didn't point out that Energy and Commerce Chairman Dingell and Subcommittee Ranking Member Stearns each expressed support for the idea of having a national set of rules for wireless service.
     

So what exactly are the consumer benefits that have flowed from national uniformity? In my testimony I mentioned that the cost per voice minute, which was about one dollar twenty years ago, has dropped to 4 cents today. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, prices for commercial wireless services have fallen more than 35% since December 1997. During the same period, the average minutes of use ("MOU") per subscriber increased six-fold, from an average of 120 MOU per month to an average of 746 MOU per month. Statistics and realities like the ones I just highlighted put the United States at the forefront of the global, mobile wireless revolution. And it is our hope that with a uniform set of national rules for wireless service, consumers can continue to get the cutting-edge mobile services they want and need at world-leading prices. Stay tuned.

From time to time bogus emails about cell phone numbers and the “Do Not Call” (DNC) Registry circulate around the internet and make their way into our inboxes.  These emails falsely claim that cell phone numbers are about to be turned over to telemarketers. The emails take on an air of credibility by saying that you can protect yourself by registering your number with the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) “Do Not Call” Registry.  Ever since these rumors began years ago, the FTC and CTIA-The Wireless Association® have diligently sought to debunk the myths.  While many folks might have heard by now that these panic-inducing emails are simply not true and cell phone numbers are NOT being turned over to telemarketers,  there are undoubtedly still some people out there who might not realize it’s a sham.  For this reason, it’s important to continue spreading the word to co-workers, families, and friends and remind consumers about the truth. 

According to the FTC, here are the facts about the DNC Registry:

• Contrary to the e-mail, cell phone numbers are NOT being released to telemarketers, and you will NOT soon be getting telemarketing calls on your cell phone. 
• There is NO deadline by which you must register your cell phone number on the Registry. 
• Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations prohibit telemarketers from using automated dialers to call cell phone numbers. Automated dialers are standard in the industry, so most telemarketers are barred from calling consumers on their cell phones without their consent. 
• The national associations representing telemarketers have stated that their members do not intend to start calling consumers’ cell phones. 
• There is only ONE National DNC Registry. There is no separate registry for cell phones. 
• The DNC Registry accepts registrations from both cell phones and land lines. You must call from the phone number that you want to register. If you register online, you must respond to a confirmation e-mail.

For more information, visit the FTC’s website: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2007/10/dnccellphones.shtm

A few days ago, the folks at Consumers Union began circulating an email to their members and supporters asking them to share negative experiences about their wireless service. Now Consumers Union is free to ask their membership whatever they like - and I’m under no illusions about convincing them to ask their membership about positive wireless experiences – but I think it's important to accurately convey how the industry continues to respond to consumer demands and the value consumers are receiving from wireless. I also believe there's a real opportunity for Consumers Union and CTIA – The Wireless Association® to work together in addressing a handful of issues that all wireless consumers are concerned about.  So with all of that in mind, I sent a letter  to Jim Guest, Consumers Union’s president, sharing with him what I believe is a great consumer story, and asking him to join us in tackling two wireless issues that directly impact wireless consumers everywhere: taxes and tower siting.     

The average tax and fee burden on wireless consumers across America (15% of the average monthly bill) is so high and so regressive that it directly affects how some Americans use their service; and in the worst case it acts as a barrier to low income citizens who want to access wireless technology but can’t. This is especially important as wireless broadband services become more and more available to American consumers. Second is the issue of tower siting and how carriers often face stringent limitations on where they can place the towers and antennas that make wireless service possible. The inability of carriers to situate their infrastructure in some cities and towns has a direct impact on the quality of wireless service.  I truly believe that a joining of forces on these issues can help make a real difference for wireless consumers across the country and I hope Consumers Union will consider partnering with us to address them.

CTIA's President and CEO Steve Largent recently penned an op-ed that appeared in today's edition of the Arizona Capitol Times. Steve's op-ed speaks to a bill (S-1010 ) that has been introduced in the Arizona legislature that if enacted would  be quite harmful to wireless consumers in the Grand Canyon State. The legislation would actually take wireless choices away from Arizona residents at a time when wireless carriers are opening up their networks and providing consumers across America with more options than ever.

In the op-ed, Steve talks about how carriers have recently  started pro-rating early termination fees and are allowing consumers to make service changes without extending the length of their contracts. He also points out that carriers abide by a national Consumer Code so that subscribers in Arizona and all across the country have a consistent and positive wireless experience. At the end of the day, Steve provides a strong argument for how consumer demand is ultimately the most effective 'regulation', and that consistent and uniform federal level regulation will continue to help consumers - and our nation's economy -  move forward. Let us know what you think.

HOW TO KEEP WIRELESS INNOVATION MOVING FORWARD IN ARIZONA – AVOID STATE REGULATION

By Steve Largent

Arizona Capitol Times, Jan. 18, 2008

Commentary

The coming of each New Year presents a great opportunity for reflection and evaluation on where we’ve been and where we’re going in the U.S. mobile phone marketplace. For most of us who now enjoy the sleek, multi-functional mini-computer that fits in the palm our hand, we simply can’t imagine life otherwise. But the remarkable thing is that the evolution from the bulky, one-dimensional “brick phone” to the transformational “iPhone” took place in less than 15 years. 

The competitive wireless industry works hard to stay in step with its customers and never hesitates to change in order to meet demand and provide consumers with a host of new and improved options. Take, for example, developments within the wireless industry in the past few months alone. Every national wireless carrier has announced that they will pro-rate early termination fees so that the longer a customer stayed in his or her contract the less they would have to pay if they choose to terminate it. On top of that, three of the five largest carriers in the country have announced that customers would be able to make changes to their existing plans without requiring a new two-year agreement.

Not to mention, 94% of Americans already live in a county with access to four or more wireless providers and 98% may choose between three or more. This is competition at its best.  And when it comes to prices, Merrill Lynch reports that Americans use more wireless minutes for less cost than any other consumers in the developed world.   

But the story doesn’t end here. The wireless industry also abides by a voluntary Consumer Code.  Followed in all 50 states, the Code requires wireless carriers to make extensive disclosures to consumers at the point of sale, provide detailed coverage maps, and itemized billing distinguishing monthly charges from taxes and fees. In short, it’s an effective, market-based approach to directly and consistently address the needs of wireless consumers. 

Despite the many pro-consumer policies adopted by wireless carriers, some lawmakers in Arizona are calling for individual state specific government regulation of the wireless industry under the guise of a “Cell Phone Bill of Rights.” This type of state-specific regulation of a national industry like wireless could be detrimental to Arizona consumers and businesses. The truth is that when you attempt to regulate a modern, high-tech industry as if it were a 1970’s public utility service, you wind-up hurting the people you’re seeking to protect.  Just imagine the cost increases and customer confusion that would ensue if wireless carriers were forced to abandon their national calling and data plans, advertising campaigns, billing and customer care systems in order to set-up and comply with dissimilar regulations in 50 -  or even two -  different states.

Actually, it sounds a lot like how phone service used to be in the 1970’s, and I am certain Arizona lawmakers do not consider that progress for their constituents.  

Wireless has earned the right to continue operating as a competitive, national industry with a consistent set of laws in all 50 states. But in order to do that, we need policies that promote our economy’s high-tech future, while resisting those that return our economy to its highly-regulated past. Let’s keep Arizona’s high-tech future moving forward by opposing Senate Bill 1010 .   

Mr. Largent, a former U.S. Representative from Oklahoma and a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame is President and CEO of CTIA – The Wireless Association®.

If Mr. Mossberg were here at CTIA’s Wireless I.T. & Entertainment 2007® show in San Francisco, he’d see what the wireless world really looks like today.  Instead of writing about the old 2G world,  he’d see firsthand how we have moved into the 3G broadband world, where options open up for consumers.

He would see that there are more than 600 different wireless devices available to consumers in the U.S. today, from carriers, manufacturers, and third-party retailers.  Wireless customers in the U.S. can exchange voice, text and photo messages, can download or watch streaming videos and listen to radio programs. There are more than 150 wireless companies providing service across the country, from nationwide to regional and local providers.  And dozens more companies have entered and exited the marketplace, driven by entrepreneurial vision and ambition to make their mark. If those things don’t define the meaning of a free market, what does?

The wireless marketplace is not static or stodgy.  Wireless service providers are not the soviet ministries of old – they are dynamic players in a competitive market, working with partners to ensure that devices deliver what consumers expect, without bringing down cell sites.  They are not dumb pipes, trying to substitute for the competitive marketplace – they are marketplace players.  They are many things at once, but what they are today is not what they will necessarily be tomorrow.  Maybe in the digital world, wireless and computing are evolving towards each other.  If so, it’s because wireless devices are offering consumers more choices and capabilities, not because the computer industry offers a better market structure.

Handset subsidies have lowered the barriers to adopting wireless service for more than 240 million Americans.  Fifteen percent of customers use prepaid or pay-as-you-go service plans that don’t involve contracts.  That’s different from many other countries, true enough, but wireless service and wireless handsets cost American consumers a lot less than they cost consumers in most other countries.  American wireless consumers pay less per minute and use more minutes than consumers in every European country – that’s a good equation for American consumers.  And there are more network operators providing more choices for consumers in the U.S. than in most other developed countries in the world.

That’s where the U.S. wireless industry is today, but that’s not where we will be tomorrow.  We won’t stop pushing the boundaries to give consumers more and better products and services.  It’s unfortunate that Mr. Mossberg has fallen for the hollow argument that the U.S. is behind in wireless.  In fact, wireless in the U.S. is dynamic, innovative, and working to deliver for consumers.