March, 12 2009, 12:33pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jen Howard, Free Press, (202) 265-1490 x22 or (703) 517-6273
Free Press Testifies on Universal Service Reform at House Hearing
WASHINGTON
In testimony before the House Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet, Free Press Research Director S. Derek Turner today urged lawmakers to make universal, affordable broadband a priority in any plans to reform the Universal Service Fund (USF).
The 10 a.m. hearing, titled "Universal Service: Reforming the High-Cost Fund," focused on ways to modernize universal service programs to meet the technological needs of the 21st century. Subcommittee Chair Rick Boucher (D-Va.) has indicated plans to introduce an updated version of the universal service reform legislation he co-sponsored with Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) during the last Congress.
A live webcast of the hearing is available at www.energycommerce.house.gov
Turner advocated fixing the deeply flawed USF by promoting efficient, accountable and fair practices and transitioning support from telephone service to broadband infrastructure -- a process that can begin with the broadband stimulus grant programs.
Prepared testimony of S. Derek Turner, research director of Free Press, included below:
Technology is rapidly changing the way Americans interact, learn and do business -- and all for the better. But the rules governing our communications markets are not keeping up with this rapid pace of change -- and consumers are suffering as a result.
When the current universal service regime was created in 1996, the Internet was an application that rode on top of the telephone infrastructure. Today, it's the opposite. Telephony is just one of many applications that ride on top of broadband infrastructure. With this convergence, comes the tremendous opportunity to ensure universal, affordable broadband access while also reducing the future burden on the Universal Service Fund.
We strongly support the goals of universal service. Everyone benefits when consumers in rural America have access to affordable, high-quality communications. But as advocates for the consumers whose monthly bills support the fund, we want to ensure that our system of universal service is both fair and efficient.
Consumers in the 21st-century marketplace should not be forced to subsidize a 20th-century technology. We believe a bold and transformative shift in USF policy is needed. Done properly, we can bring affordable broadband to all Americans, while also substantially reducing the size of the fund in the long term.
We must begin by asking two basic questions: First, how much money is each customer receiving from USF each month; and second, is that support actually needed?
Our research shows that 40 percent of the High-Cost Fund -- nearly $2 billion -- goes to subsidizing lines that receive less than $10 per month. This is also true for small rate-of-return carriers. Two-thirds of these lines receive less than $10 per month in high-cost support.
These subsidies may be justified, but it begs the question: Is this the best use of that $2 billion? We should also question whether rates in these areas are already below the national average and if this money might be better spent on broadband deployment to bring these customers more than just a telephone line.
The data points us to a path forward -- a way to bring universal broadband and to end the over-reliance on subsidies. This path begins with recognizing how convergence has changed the businesses of telecommunications.
Before broadband, carriers were only able to earn perhaps $20 per customer each month selling phone service. In today's converged world, a carrier can earn well over $100 on that same line by offering phone, TV and Internet service.
Unfortunately, our current regulatory structure doesn't account for the fact that this additional revenue provides many carriers in high-cost areas the opportunity to operate profitably without ongoing subsidies. Instead, it tries to clumsily separate out regulated from unregulated costs and revenues, and just results in overpayments and anti-competitive subsidies.
As an alternative to this broken process, we suggest basing ongoing high-cost support on total revenue earning potential and forward-looking infrastructure costs, calculated for each carrier on a granular, disaggregated basis. This modernized regulatory structure will reduce the need for ongoing support, as many carriers will be able to recoup network costs and earn healthy profits from "triple-play" service revenues.
However, for some carriers, the upfront costs for deploying broadband into currently unserved areas are just too high. Here is where we have the opportunity to turn the regulatory structure on its head. We should use the fund to pay these upfront costs, and then only provide ongoing support where it is truly needed.
We propose a 10-year transition, where the new "total cost/potential revenue" support model is phased in, and the resulting cost-savings are used to fund the buildout of open access broadband infrastructure to unserved areas. We estimate that after the 10-year transition, the total size of the High-Cost Fund could be reduced by two-thirds, to less than $1.5 billion per year.
The $7 billion in broadband stimulus funds presents policymakers with a window of opportunity to transform USF. A substantial portion of the upfront costs for rural networks may be financed by taxpayer dollars. The carriers operating these networks will thus have little capital costs to recover, and therefore little need for traditional ongoing high-cost fund support.
But unless the FCC moves to modernize the regulatory structure, we may see "double-dipping." By that I mean carriers might ask ratepayers to reimburse them for the networks already paid for by taxpayers.
Getting universal service policy right isn't the only thing we need to do to ensure universal service. For rural carriers, the viability of the self-supporting triple-play business model depends on getting fair rates and terms for transport and special access services, and getting fair access to video programming.
In closing, we urge Congress to maintain its commitment to universal service, but to do so with policies that are flexible and that benefit all consumers.
The full written testimony can be read at https://www.freepress.net/files/FP_Congressional_Testimony_USF_March2009.pdf
Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. We believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
(202) 265-1490LATEST NEWS
Stateless Palestinian Woman Details 'Very Traumatizing' Abuse Suffered in ICE Detention
Trump administration immigration officials reportedly dismissed Ward Sakeik's ordeal as a "sob story."
Jul 06, 2025
A newlywed Palestinian woman from Texas released from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention earlier this week says she was shackled for long periods, denied food and water, and subjected to other human rights abuses during nearly five months in ICE custody—all because she is a stateless person.
Ward Sakeik, 22, was born in Saudi Arabia to Palestinian parents from Gaza. Because Saudi Arabia does not grant birthright citizenship to the children of foreign nationals, Sakeik was officially stateless when her family legally emigrated to the United States when she was 8 years old.
“I was moved around like cattle.”
Ward Sakeik, US college graduate and homeowner, speaks out following 140 days in ICE hellhole pic.twitter.com/bNTgs7362h
— World Socialist Web Site (@WSWS_Updates) July 5, 2025
Sakeik's parents subsequently applied for—and were denied—asylum in the U.S. but were allowed to remain legally in the country pending routine check-ins with ICE.
After graduating high school and the University of Texas, Arlington, starting a wedding photography business, marrying a U.S. citizen, and beginning the process of obtaining a green card, Sakeik and her husband went on their honeymoon in the U.S. Virgin Islands. She was detained shortly after arriving back in the United States after Customs and Border Protection agents flagged her for flying over international waters—a move that Department of Homeland Security officials said violated immigration policy.
"After a few hours from returning from our honeymoon, I was put in a gray tracksuit and shackles," Sakeik said at a press conference following her release. "I was handcuffed for 16 hours without any water or food on the bus. I have moved around like cattle. And the U.S. government attempted to dump me in a part of the world where I don't know where I'm going and what I'm doing or anything."
"We were not given any water or food, and we could smell the driver eating Chick-fil-A," she continued. "We would ask for water, bang on the door for food, and he would just turn up the radio and act like he wasn't listening to us."
Sakeik said unhygienic conditions at the Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas—where an ICE officer was shot in the neck during a Friday evening attack—caused widespread illness among detainees.
"The restrooms are also very, very, very unhygienic," she said. "The beds have rust everywhere. They're not properly maintained. And cockroaches, grasshoppers, spiders, you name it, are all over the facility. Girls would get bit."
"I wouldn't wish this upon anybody," Sakeik said during a Saturday interview on CNN. "It was very hard, very traumatizing, and very, very difficult."
Eric Lee, an attorney for Sakeik, told CNN that immigration officials dismissed Sakeik's account as a "sob story."
"I guess what we would ask the American people is, 'Who are they gonna believe, their lying eyes or the statements of the people who are responsible for carrying out what are really crimes against humanity here in the United States?'" Lee added.
Sakeik said she now plans to advocate on behalf of women and girls imprisoned by ICE.
"I... want the world to know that the women who do come here come here for a better life, but they're criminalized for that," she said. "They are dehumanized, and they're stripped away from their rights. We have been treated as a 'less-than' just simply for wanting a better life."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Exactly What We Would Expect': Climate Scientists Weigh in on Deadly Texas Flooding
"It's not a question of whether climate change played a role—it's only a question of how much," said one expert.
Jul 06, 2025
As the death toll from catastrophic flooding in Texas continued to rise, climate scientists this weekend underscored the link between more frequent and severe extreme weather events and the worsening climate emergency caused primarily by humans burning fossil fuels.
Officials said Sunday that at least 69 people died in the floods, 59 of them in Kerr County. Of the 27 missing girls from Camp Mystic—some of whom were sleeping just 225 feet from the Guadalupe River when its waters surged during flash flooding Friday—11 are still missing.
While some local officials blamed what they said were faulty forecasts from the National Weather Service—which has been hit hard by staffing cuts ordered by the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency in line with Project 2025—meteorologists and climate scientists including Daniel Swain of the University of California, Los Angeles have refuted such allegations, citing multiple NWS warnings of potentially deadly flooding.
However, some experts asserted that vacancies at key NWS posts raise questions about forecasters' ability to coordinate emergency response with local officials.
Climate scientists do concur that human-caused global heating is causing stronger and more frequent extreme weather events including flooding.
"This kind of record-shattering rain (caused by slow-moving torrential thunderstorms) event is *precisely* that which is increasing the fastest in a warming climate," Swain wrote in a statement. "So it's not a question of whether climate change played a role—it's only a question of how much."
As Jeff Masters and Bob Henson wrote Saturday for Yale Climate Connections:
Many studies have confirmed that human-caused climate change is making the heaviest short-term rainfall events more intense, largely by warming the world's oceans and thus sending more water vapor into the atmosphere that can fuel heavy rain events. Sea surface temperatures this week have been as much as 1°F below the 1981-2010 average for early July in the western Gulf [of Mexico] and Caribbean, but up to 1°F above average in the central Gulf. Long-term human-caused warming made the latter up to 10 times more likely, according to the Climate Shift Index from Climate Central.
"The tragic events in Texas are exactly what we would expect in our hotter, climate-changed, world," Bill McGuire, professor emeritus of geophysics and climate hazards at University College London, said Saturday. "There has been an explosion in extreme weather in recent years, including more devastating flash floods caused by slow-moving, wetter, storms, that dump exceptional amounts of rain over small areas across a short time."
It’s hard to make the Texas flood tragedy worse, except to know that on the same day Trump signed a bill to stop our efforts to defeat the climate change that is causing increased frequency of disastrous floods. And giving us more expensive electricity. www.nytimes.com/2025/07/05/c...
[image or embed]
— Governor Jay Inslee (@govjayinslee.bsky.social) July 5, 2025 at 9:29 AM
Instead of taking action to combat the planetary emergency, the Trump administration is ramping up fossil fuel production while waging war on clean energy and climate initiatives. The so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed into law by Trump on Friday slashes the tax credits for electric vehicles and other renewable technologies including wind and solar energy that were a cornerstone of the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act.
Keep ReadingShow Less
27 Arrested for Defying UK Ban on Nonviolent Pro-Palestine Group
"We oppose genocide—I didn't think that was that controversial—and we support the people who resist genocide," said one arrested protester.
Jul 06, 2025
Metropolitan Police arrested at least 27 protesters who gathered in central London on Saturday to publicly support Palestine Action, a nonviolent direct action group now officially designated a terrorist organization by the U.K. government.
According to Middle East Eye, Palestine defenders including 83-year-old Rev. Sue Parfitt, a former government attorney, an emeritus professor, and health workers gathered by a statue of Mahatma Gandhi in Parliament Square, where they held signs reading, "I OPPOSE GENOCIDE, I SUPPORT PALESTINE ACTION."
Members of the group Defend Our Juries informed Metropolitan Police of their plan prior to the demonstration.
"If we cannot speak freely about the genocide that is occurring... democracy and human rights in this country are dead."
"We would like to alert you to the fact we may be committing offenses under the Terrorism Act tomorrow, Saturday 5 July, in Parliament Square at about 1pm," the group said in an open letter to Met Commissioner Mark Rowley.
"If we cannot speak freely about the genocide that is occurring, if we cannot condemn those who are complicit in it and express support for those who resist it, then the right to freedom of expression has no meaning, and democracy and human rights in this country are dead," the letter argues.
Parfitt told Novara Media that members of Defend Our Juries were "testing the law."
"I know that we are in the right place doing the right thing," she said. "...We cannot be bystanders."
"We are losing our civil liberties, we must stop that for everybody's sake," Parfitt said in a separate interview with The Guardian.
Prior to his arrest, Defend Our Juries member Tim Crosland, the former government lawyer, told The Guardian that "what we're doing here as a group of priests, teachers, health workers, human rights lawyers [is] we're refusing to be silenced."
"Because it goes to the core of what we believe in: that we oppose genocide—I didn't think that was that controversial—and we support the people who resist genocide," he added. "In theory we are now terrorist supporters and can go to prison for 14 years, which is kind of crazy. I think what we are here to do is just expose the craziness of that."
Crosland said as he was being arrested, "This is what happens in modern day Britain for opposing genocide, it's quite something isn't it?"
A bystander told Novara Media: "I just feel disgusted by this government. I voted for them and they're now arresting people who are calling for a genocide to end. And this is a Labour government, they're meant to have left-wing roots."
Members of the group Defend Our Juries publicly declare their opposition to Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza and their support for the proscribed group Palestine Action while Metropolitan Police officers look on before arresting them during a July 4, 2025 demonstration in London. (Photo: Kristian Buus/In Pictures via Getty Images)
In a statement, Defend Our Juries sarcastically said that "we commend the counter-terrorism police for their decisive action in protecting the people of London from some cardboard signs opposing the genocide in Gaza and expressing support for those taking action to prevent it."
"It's a relief to know that counter-terrorism police have nothing better to do," the group quipped.
Last week, British lawmakers voted to ban Palestine Action as a terrorist group after some of its members vandalized two aircraft at a Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire on June 20. The group—which was founded in 2020 and has also vandalized U.S. President Donald Trump's golf course in Turnberry, Scotland—is known for taking direction action against companies that supply weapons to Israel, which is accused of genocide in an ongoing International Court of Justice case concerning the war on Gaza.
On June 23, U.K. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe the group under Section 3 of the Terrorism Act of 2000, introduced under former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair and widely criticized for its overbroad definition of terrorism. The House of Commons voted 385-26 Wednesday in favor of banning Palestine Action and the House of Lords approved the designation Thursday without a vote.
Palestine Action tried to delay the ban via legal action. However, the High Court on Friday denied the group's appeal for interim relief was denied on Friday, a decision that was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
The nonviolent group is now on the same legal footing in Britain as Al-Qaeda and Islamic State. Joining or supporting Palestine Action is now punishable by up to 14 years behind bars.
At midnight, Palestine Action will be proscribed under the Terrorism Act.Their real “crime”? Exposing the UK’s role in arming Israel’s genocide.This is a dark day for our democracy.Criminalising non-violent resistance won’t silence the truth.We are all Palestine Action 🇵🇸
[image or embed]
— Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana.bsky.social) July 4, 2025 at 2:38 PM
Earlier this month, a group of United Nations experts urged the U.K. government to not ban Palestine Action.
"We are concerned at the unjustified labeling of a political protest movement as 'terrorist,'" the experts wrote. "According to international standards, acts of protest that damage property, but are not intended to kill or injure people, should not be treated as terrorism."
The U.N. experts warned that under the ban, "individuals could be prosecuted for peacefully exercising their rights to freedom of expression and opinion, assembly, association, and participation in political life."
"This would have a chilling effect on political protest and advocacy generally in relation to defending human rights in Palestine," they added.
Hundreds of jurists, artists and entertainers, and others have also decried the ban on Palestine Action.
"Palestine Action is intervening to stop a genocide. It is acting to save life. We deplore the government's decision to proscribe it," Artists for Palestine U.K.—whose members include Tilda Swinton, Paul Weller, Steve Coogan, and others—wrote in a statement last month.
"Labeling non-violent direct action as 'terrorism' is an abuse of language and an attack on democracy," the artists added. "The real threat to the life of the nation comes not from Palestine Action but from the home secretary's efforts to ban it. We call on the government to withdraw its proscription of Palestine Action and to stop arming Israel."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular