Question and Answers About The TeleTruth Comments Q: What's going on at the FCC that I should care about? How will it effect my Internet and Broadband Service? Answer: If you use an independent ISP or CLEC, (competitive local exchange Company) you should know that the FCC plans to allow the phone and cable monopolies to block your current service provider from offering you broadband-level connections to the Internet. This will limit your choices of broadband services in the future and make it a lot easier for cable and telephone companies to increase the prices you will have to pay them for broadband service. It will also slow down innovation and directly harm the entire economy through a lack of Next generation services. It should be remembered that the ISPs and CLECs brought America the Internet, not the local phone monopolies. Q: How is the FCC doing this? Answer: The FCC has launched six different proposals for public comment which taken together add up to a new framework for the Commission's national broadband policy. All six proposals pave the way for eliminating many of the reforms used to bring competition to regular telephone service markets. Specifically, they permit the incumbent phone and cable monopolies to stop rivals from using parts of their broadband networks to connect to you and/or your business. Q: Isn't this like the "Tauzin-Dingell" bill, which was to help the Bell companies? Answer: This is "Tauzin-Dingell Lite". It is the FCC doing giveaways to the local monopoly. Q: Why should I care about these TeleTruth Comments? Answer: TeleTruth has filed in all six proceedings, claiming that the FCC is violating numerous parts of the "Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980" (as amended) which requires all federal agencies, including the FCC, to ensure that the regulations they enact do not directly harm small businesses. While the FCC has presented a "Initial Flexibility Analysis" as required, as we demonstrate, the materials presented are totally inadequate. Q: What goes into an "Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis" (IRFA)? Answer: The Act requires that federal agencies consider the approximate number of companies that might be affected, the potential costs to these small companies including and an economic analysis, alternatives that should be considered as well as proper notification so that companies who might be impacted can respond. And these reports can not be simply 'boilerplate' discussions, but a serious analysis. According to the Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy: "The RFA establishes an analytical process, not merely procedural steps, for analyzing the impact of regulations on small entities. Boilerplate analyses or certifications will not satisfy the law. The law anticipates that something substantive will emerge from the process to ensure that public policy is enhanced." (emphasis added) Q: What are the FCC's violations? Answer -- Every part of the FCC's current Dockets is a problem. The FCC has failed to properly notify and get Comments from the small telecom businesses. The FCC is required to be proactive in soliciting comments specifically for the IRFA, from those companies that may be impacts. The FCC has failed to make a reasonable effort to accurately assess the number of small telecom competitors harmed by these rulings. This includes CLECs, and ISPs. In the Wireline Broadband Document, the entire analysis of companies impacted is two paragraphs and leaves out ISPs -- who will lose the right to order services from CLECs if this act goes through. The Cable modem inquiry makes the same mistakes and fails to identify Internet Providers as companies that will be impacted by the decision. The analysis of the number of companies provided by the FCC incorporates data out of date and is inaccurate. For example, the FCC uses data from 1992 and 1997. In some of the IRFAs the FCC actually states: " ...we are unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of these carriers that would qualify as small business concerns under SBA's definition." The FCC has failed to accurately assess the number of small businesses that depend on these companies and the impact its decisions will have on this group of small businesses. ISPs and CLECs offer unique services, such as SDSL or Voice over IP, that the FCC has failed to examine or include. The FCC failed to consider or offer meaningful alternatives to the core impacts of its proposed rulings as required by law. The FCC states in the "wireline broadband as an Information Service" docket (02-33) that the ISPs will at least have less regulation as an alternative---- even though this law will effectively block the ISPs from reselling Bell ADSL services and could put them out of business. The harm to the current competition and broadband rollout is completely ignored. In numerous complaints, filings and law suits, it is clear that the FCC has never enforced the laws the protect small ISPs and CLECs and the FCC never addresses these issues in any of its small business impact analyses. To see a full list of the Violations see: http://www.newnetworks.com/violations.htm Q: Are there any other critics of the FCC's failure to comply with these rules? Answer; The Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy has been very critical of the FCC's ability to properly do an analysis of the markets, and alternatives and has made suggestions in numerous filings to this effect. Q: What solution does TeleTruth propose? Answer: The FCC should immediately halt these proceedings and be in compliance with the law, including redoing the IFRA to represent small ISPs and CLECs. And if the FCC does not comply, TeleTruth will seek a judicial review as allowed by law to block these proposed rules. We also call upon everyone else who cares about this issue to join this campaign--- join TeleTruth and write the FCC. .