Free Telephones and Service

I just sent the following message to Sen. Hutchison:

Dear Sen. Hutchison,
Thank you for your reply concerning my request for information on why you had voted for free telephones and service for a segment of the American public.

I notice that you have not answered my question in your reply below. I also notice that you have copied several portions of text from the USF webpage.

I repeat my question on how you and your associate senators can justify a Marxist program for redistribution of wealth in this Republic of the United States. You may be confused into thinking that the cost of this program comes out of thin air, since I notice you quote from the USF webpage as follows:
"All telephone service providers are required to contribute to the USF according to a formula based on interstate calls, but they are not required to pass the fees on to the consumer directly."

In the above statement, you and USF imply that the big, bad service providers are responsible for any increase in my telephone bills, through direct charges or taxes. Not so. These companies are in business to make a profit. Not to give away money through free equipment and service. You make the mandates, and I end up paying.

Free telephones and service is welfare. If I want to contribute to welfare, it should be my option. You should not force it upon me and believe it is justifiable because I am a compassionate person and feel that all underprivileged and poor people should have access to a telephone. I don't feel that way at all. A telephone is a convenience for the private person. In order to have access to a convenience, he needs to pay for it. Not expect someone else to pay for it. It may even be an incentive for him to do some work, so that he can pay for his telephone.

Let's quit all these giveaway programs. You're on the wrong track. This is supposed to be the land of opportunity. Not a land of free stuff.

Dr. Arthur C. Sucsy
4203 96th Street
Lubbock, TX 79423
806-794-1381
asucsy@suddenlink.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison [mailto:senator@hutchison.senate.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 2:58 PM
To: asucsy@suddenlink.net
Subject: Constituent Response From Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison

Dear Friend:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) Universal Service Fund. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.

The FCC established the Universal Service Fund (USF) to help bring telephone access to low-income Americans. The USF compensates telephone companies that provide service to rural, insular, and high-cost areas, and it also subsidizes internet access for schools and libraries. All telephone service providers are required to contribute to the USF according to a formula based on interstate calls, but they are not required to pass the fees on to the consumer directly or to list it as a separate item when billing. Some companies charge a percentage of the total bill, some a flat fee, and some do not distinguish the USF fee from general service.

In December of 2002, the FCC made changes in the USF contribution mechanism including a decision to roughly double the contribution of wireless providers. The FCC believes that wireless companies underestimate their contributions because new options like internet phones and no-roaming plans make it difficult to identify interstate commerce. Higher contribution from wireless companies is expected to generate enough revenue to provide stability for the USF program while the FCC continues to assess other funding mechanisms. Should legislation on this issue come before the Senate, you may be certain I will keep your views in mind.

I appreciate hearing from you and hope you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you.

Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator