A move to give states USF money in...
A move to give states USF money in line with what they pay in to the fund is understandable, but has some troubling implications, said Aspen Institute Fellow Blair Levin Monday in remarks to the Alaska Telephone Association. Levin reacted…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
to legislation introduced in December by Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., which would ensure rural states get back 75 cents of every dollar they pay into the fund (http://1.usa.gov/M6dTts). “The troubling part is that if Senators look at the issue through the lens of their own state and only try to solve for the question of how to get their state more money or find a formula that works best for their own state, we will never improve Universal Service,” Levin said in prepared remarks. “Indeed, it is unlikely that Universal Service will survive, unless, like mythical Lake Woebegone, we can create a situation in which all states are above average in obtaining USF support.” The House Republican leadership is proposing to rewrite the Telecom Act, noted Levin, a Democrat and primary author of the FCC’s 2010 National Broadband Plan: “If the Republicans take the Senate, delivering a bill whose purpose will be dramatic deregulation is not unthinkable.”