Statement by Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) in Congressional Record. Re: Introduction of HR 3022, the Rest of Truth in Telephone Billing Act. Date: October 6, 1999. Source: Congressional Record, October 6, 1999, pages E2036-7.

HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY
in the House of Representatives
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the `Rest of the Truth in Telephone Billing Act of 1999.' The title of the bill reflects the fact that some of the `truth in telephone billing' has already been proposed in a bill by two of my esteemed Commerce Committee colleagues, Chairman Bliley and Telecommunications Subcommittee Tauzin. I offer the `rest of the truth' to point out that a listing of fees and taxes only provides half the story. The other half of the story is the subsidies in the telecommunications marketplace, which I believe need to be made just as explicit on a consumer's bill as the fees and taxes in order to fully inform consumers of what they do and do not pay for when they subscribe to telecommunications services.

Mr. Speaker, the telecommunications marketplace is rife with such subsidies. Many of these subsidies are quite noble in intention and help to pay for affordable telecommunications service for the poor and for rural consumers. Yet many of these subsidies reflect a historic monopoly marketplace and should be revisited as the marketplace changes. For instance, some of these subsidies may still be needed and there are some which ought to be adjusted (or even eliminated) to reflect a more competitive marketplace.

The `truth,' Mr. Speaker, is that many consumers in America today pay too much to support a bloated subsidy system that was designed to support inefficient monopoly-provided service. As efficiencies arrive in the marketplace due to technological changes and the competitive entry of new providers, I believe that many subsidized services could be provided at lower cost, and therefore less subsidy, than previously provided.

Providing subsidies sufficient to keep costs low in rural America and for the inner city poor, or to hook up schools and libraries, ought to be done in a manner that reflects the actual costs of providing the service. In order to ensure that we give consumers the rest of the truth in telephone billing, I suggest in the legislative proposal I am offering today, that we insist that both the fees and taxes AND the subsidies be made explicit for consumers and listed on their bills.

I suggest that we give consumers the full story. Consumers should know when they're paying $8 in fees or $18 in taxes. They should also know whether they're simultaneously receiving (or paying) a hitherto implicit subsidy to the tune of $2 or $200. I look forward to working with Chairman Bliley and Chairman Tauzin on their legislative proposal and to discussions with our other colleagues--both urban and rural--on how we can better ascertain the true costs, true taxes, true fees, and the true subsidies embedded in the telecommunications bills that consumers pay monthy.