Copyright 1999 Globe Newspaper Company
The Boston
Globe
View Related Topics
March 15, 1999, Monday ,City Edition
SECTION: OP-ED; Pg. A21
LENGTH: 665 words
HEADLINE:
Bell Atlantic's blocked lines;
CHRISTOPHER GREGORY;
Christopher Gregory
is executive director of Breakthrough Massachusetts.
BYLINE: By Christopher Gregory
BODY:
In 1996 President Clinton
signed into law the Telecommunications Act, a piece of legislation aimed at
breaking up the local telephone monopoly controlled by the Baby Bells and
bringing competition to local telecommunications markets.
So far, the
Telecom Act's promise to Massachusetts consumers of reduced rates, improved
service, and new and innovative products remains unfulfilled.
The
Telecom Act includes clear incentives meant to force the Bell companies to open
the local market to competition. Under the law, the Bells can offer
long-distance service within their own service areas only after irreversible
competition exists in the local market. To ensure that such competition exists,
the act includes a 14-point checklist of items that must be met before the Bells
are allowed to provide long-distance service.
In Massachusetts, Bell
Atlantic has yet to meet many - if not most - of the requirements of the
checklist.
Would-be competitors, including those represented by
Breakthrough Massachusetts, a coalition of telephone service providers formed
last year, believe that talk of long-distance entry for Bell Atlantic is
premature given the numerous obstacles to competition preventing Massachusetts
consumers from realizing the benefits envisioned by the Telecom Act.
The
truth is that new local providers have had to fight every step of the way - in
the courts, the Legislature, and before the Massachusetts Department of
Telecommunications and Energy - to be able to provide the limited services they
do today. Meanwhile, residential customers have seen none of the benefits of
competition that the business world has only started to enjoy.
The
congressional intent of the Telecom Act of 1996 is clear. The Bell companies
must give up their local monopoly strongholds so consumers will have choice.
Certainly, numerous technical issues need to be resolved. However, without a
cooperative effort by the state and federal governments, new providers, and
especially the Baby Bells, progress will be slow.
Recently, Breakthrough
Massachusetts joined AT&T in asking the DTE to establish just such an
industrywide collaborative process to address several issues preventing
competitors from entering the local market today. Bell Atlantic has refused to
join.
Last month three Pennsylvania state senators withdrew from
industrywide talks aimed at opening the local telephone market there, claiming
that Bell Atlantic's stalling was preventing the participants from reaching an
agreement.
Senators Vincent Fumo, Roger Madigan, and Mary Joe White
said: "Bell thinks it can get access to the long-distance market without giving
up its local monopoly."
Consumer choice equals better service and lower
prices. Since the breakup of AT&T and the introduction of choice to the
long-distance marketplace, more than 600 long-distance providers have appeared,
and long-distance rates have fallen 70 percent.
In fact, according to
William Kennard, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission,
"Long-distance rates fell 5.3 percent between January of 1996 and November of
1997."
Local telephone consumers do not have a choice. Bell Atlantic
does. It must decide whether to abide by the terms of the Telecommunications Act
and open its market to competition or continue stonewalling, foot dragging, and
interminably delaying customer choice and benefits.
Breakthrough
Massachusetts and its members are more than willing to work with the DTE,
Attorney General Thomas Reilly, and Bell Atlantic to ensure that the proper
foundation is in place for residential and business customers alike to be able
to choose among numerous local-service providers.
Ninety-eight percent
of the local Massachusetts phone market is controlled by Bell Atlantic. Allowing
Bell Atlantic to provide long-distance service before that percentage drops
dramatically would only extend its monopoly reach, harming the same consumers
the Telecommuncations Act was created to help.
LOAD-DATE: March 15, 1999 
