News

Verizon Yesterday Versus Today: New Wires, Old Rules?

AT&T Public Policy Blog By AT&T Blog Team

As comments in the special access proceeding (oops, I mean Business Data Services proceeding) roll in, I thought I would put together a few sentences which accurately capture AT&T’s views on this proceeding:

“[T]here is no basis on which to increase regulation of ILEC business broadband services, including legacy special access and Ethernet. [T]here is no evidence supporting a finding that ILEC rates for traditional TDM-based special access services (e.g., DS1 and DS3) are unjust and unreasonable. There is no factual basis to support a finding of market power or market failure in the business broadband marketplace. According to the Commission’s data, competitors have deployed networks capable of providing high-capacity services in all metropolitan areas throughout the country that contain concentrated demand for these services. Although the Commission’s data understate the extent of actual and potential competition, even with these shortcomings these data show competitors have deployed networks capable of providing high-capacity services in all metropolitan areas throughout the country that contain concentrated demand for these services.”

None of those are AT&T’s words. In fact, all of those statements were written by Verizon this year and submitted to the FCC in this proceeding before they teamed up with INCOMPAS (a CLEC trade group currently, emphasis on currently, opposing their pending acquisition of the assets of XO Communications before the FCC). Verizon is no stranger to doublespeak. Remember, this is the company that appealed the 2010 net neutrality decision only to argue ten months later to re-enact the same rules on the same legal basis which it had successfully appealed. But the BDS policy Verizon is now advocating will result in lower incentives for all carriers to invest in fiber infrastructure in this country. It may be that Verizon’s current business plans actually call for lower capital investment having just sold off vast amounts of their wireline infrastructure, but the fact remains that a “less fiber investment” policy is not one the FCC should be pursuing.

This serious potential fallout from unwise FCC action remains, despite the fact that Verizon is whistling a new CLEC-like tune. As the FCC moves to examine the comments recently filed in this proceeding, they should remember that Verizon was for pro-investment policies before they were against them.

Read more at AT&T Public Policy Blog…

investinbbandVerizon Yesterday Versus Today: New Wires, Old Rules?