roundtable: Re: "draft telecommunications bill"

roundtable: Re: "draft telecommunications bill"

Re: "draft telecommunications bill"

Mary Gardiner Jones (mgjones@apt.org)
Wed, 8 Mar 1995 19:16:14 -0500 (EST) 

Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 19:16:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Mary Gardiner Jones <mgjones@apt.org>
Subject: Re: "draft telecommunications bill"
To: roundtable@cni.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950306115421.16636B-100000@uhunix2>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9503081954.C23751-0100000@idi.net>


I agree we have to start thinking about applying funds for public 
interest purposes. Don't forget that we have substantial funds generated 
by auctions of specturm. I agree that Congress is inent on applying these 
for general revenue purposes but I dont think we should sit still for 
this.  There are other sources of reveneus available. An important source 
is the savings which will accrue to Telcos (and perhaps cable) from the  
greater rpdocutivity and reduced maintenance costs of fiber optic 
networks which they are currently installing for their video dial tone 
networks. These funds should be plowed back into the public interest 
purposes such as helping communities aggragate demands for advanced 
services (in their education, health care and governbment information 
service community needs). this helps communities and the carriers. There 
is also a great need for educting and trianing non profits and community 
organziations in using these advanced technologies. Carriers shouldb e 
encouraged and PUCs should make this part of their social contract to 
reuqire them to use their funds in these public interest modes. After all 
these funds derived largely from the public netowkr returns which were 
based on rate payers money.

Mary Gardiner Jones
Alliance for Public Technology (APT)	|   Internet:	mgjones@apt.org

[CNI Home Page]