Re: Phone companies call for hefty rate increases, Aug. 28.
This article takes a complex subject, simplifies it beyond recognition and, in the process, misleads consumers. Currently, the residential telephone customer does not enjoy the benefits of competition the way cellular and business customers do. That's because local residential rates are subsidized. The Verizon restructuring proposal will fix this legacy of the monopoly era - all without Verizon getting an extra penny.
Relying heavily on terms like "rate hikes," the story conjures up images of old times when rate cases did indeed generate more revenue for Verizon. That is not what would happen here. The $77-million subsidy now paid by in-state long distance users would be moved to the local portion of the bill. At the same time, there would be a $77-million reduction in carrier access charges, which must be passed on to consumers.
The truth is, customers are paying that $77-million every year through higher long distance prices, hiding the actual costs associated with local telephone service and hampering the development of a market-based telecommunications economy.
By removing this subsidy from the system, the price charged for residential service will move closer to the cost of that service. For competitive companies looking at the residential market, the profit margin will be greater, making residential customers a more attractive option while making capital investment in Florida more appealing.
In the process, the most vulnerable customers will be protected. But the article also fails to mention that eligibility for the Lifeline program will be expanded to include as many as 1-million additional customers. This is a significant enhancement for some of Florida's most needy citizens, those at 125 percent of the federal poverty level and who are eligible for one or more of six federally approved assistance programs.
Given the chance, the Tele-competition and Infrastructure Enhancement Act will bring many benefits to our region's citizens. A more balanced representation in the St. Petersburg Times of Verizon's proposal would have revealed that.
-- Alan Ciamporcero, president, public policy and external affairs, Southeast region, Verizon, Tampa
Rate increase requests came swiftly
Re: Phone companies call for hefty rate increases.
It was no great surprise to read that Verizon and Sprint would like to raise basic residential phone rates by huge percentages. The only surprising thing was the speed in which those phone companies filed rate increase requests with the Florida Public Service Commission. The phone service providers' ability to ask for rate increases would not have been possible if not for a bad anticonsumer bill becoming law earlier this year. The legislation had hardly cooled off after making its rounds through the legislative and executive offices before the rate increase applications were filed. As a state senator, I and a few of my colleagues voted against the bill but it unfortunately passed anyway. The dire warnings we and consumer groups issued about the bill have, sadly, come true.
I voted against this bill precisely because I expected the phone companies to raise rates, which they are now attempting to do. Contrary to what they promised during legislative committee meetings, the phone service providers intend to do this over the next two years, not the three the Legislature was led to believe. Additionally, instead of expanding the Lifeline program for low-income individuals as promised, the phone companies merely are "freezing" rates for them. It seems that the huge amount of money spent on lobbyists by the phone companies to get this bill passed will be returned many-fold in potential revenues if these increases are approved.
The only saving grace in this sad affair is that the Public Service Commission must approve the rate applications. I urge the commission to hold public hearings in the local communities that will be impacted by these rate increases, not in Tallahassee where the expense of traveling may be too great for most individuals. Phone company executives have the deep pockets to pay for such travel, but not the average phone customer. I encourage all customers of these two companies who oppose paying an additional 40 percent or more per month for local phone service to call the Public Service Commission to lodge their objections and to ask for locally held public hearings. The commission can be reached toll-free at 1-800-342-3552.
-- Mike Fasano, state senator, District 11, Tallahassee
Keep basic phone service reasonable
Re: Phone companies call for hefty rate increases.
You said that for Verizon, "monthly residential base rates . . . vary from $10.12 . . . to $12.10 for most residents" in the Tampa Bay area. This is misleading. My residence line cost is $11.10 plus $6.50 federal subscriber line charge and taxes of $2.85, for a total monthly bill of $20.45 without any long distance or extra services. An increase of even $4 would make our monthly phone cost $25, which I think is way too high. Utilities, including basic phone service, are necessities, and I believe they should be regulated by the government.
I hope the Public Service Commission has some members who care about the consumers enough to stand up against the phone companies. I am not interested in having long-distance calls less expensive. I use prepaid phone cards from Sam's Club for three cents a minute for the few long distance calls I make. I do not use Caller ID or any extra service. I just want a basic phone service at a reasonable price. If this Public Service Commission doesn't work any better than the state Insurance Commission (which granted State Farm a 42-percent increase on our homeowners coverage), I expect the phone companies will get what they want.
-- Jeanne Pfaltzgraf, New Port Richey
Voters, take action
So the phone companies want to raise phone rates. Gee, I'll bet Jeb Bush is surprised. I wonder what else our elected officials can do to sell out the people who elected them. I'm sure they think their constituents are stupid enough to re-elect them.
I believe Florida has the most arrogant legislators of any state in America. They just ignore the people and support big business. Hopefully, next election will turn the tide. It's up to us, the voting public, to put a stop to it. Let's do it.
-- John D'Aluisio, Hudson
God has little reason to bless America
Re: Alabama rock is rolled away, Aug. 28.
"God bless America," we like to sing. Do you really think God will bless America? After all, why should he? We've removed God from the schools, stopped school prayer, we blaspheme God's name in movies, TV and everyday speech, and you think that God will "bless America"?
It is wrong and ridiculous to think that having the Ten Commandments in a public place violates separation of church and state. This country was founded on God's laws and biblical principles. Chief Justice Roy Moore is to be congratulated on his stand.
I wonder how many of the objectors have ever read Exodus 20 or are familiar with why God wrote these words in the first place? God gave us these laws to live by. Remember, "God is not mocked," Galatians 6:7.
-- Hazel Vernon, Oldsmar
Separation is wise
Re: Alabama judge's principled stand deserves praise, letter, Aug. 26.
The letter writer claims the Constitution's Establishment Clause (First Amendment) justifies Chief Justice Roy Moore's defiance of a federal court order and of America's traditional separation of church and state.
He used a sleight of mind (also used by Bishop W. Thomas Larkin in a recent letter, Reading into the First Amendment) to change the meaning of the Establishment Clause. He cites the text accurately, then argues as if the amendment included a definite article, "a" before religion. The Establishment Clause is general, not definite. It prohibits all establishment of "religion" (general), not just establishment of "a religion" (specific).
This ban requires all government to remain neutral about religion. This wise separation of church and state has kept civic life free from religious strife and religious life free from governmental meddling.
Have the writer and the bishop and Judge Moore learned nothing from the bloody, conflicted history of state-supported religion? As America becomes more diverse, our unique separation of church and state becomes more essential to civic peace and wholesome religious development. The "principled stand" of Alabama's Judge Moore is like the road to hell. It may be paved with good intentions, but it rests on sinking sand, not solid rock.
-- The Rev. Harold M. Brockus, board member, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, St. Petersburg
Sending us toward moral destruction
Re: Alabama judge's principled stand deserves praise.
Congratulations to the letter writer for his words of wisdom in regard to the debate over the Ten Commandments. I say, shame on the people who had the Commandments removed. They have failed to realize that these commandments were given to all of us centuries ago, by God himself.
Our Constitution was written using the principles within the Ten Commandments. Unfortunately, we have in our society, far too many anti-God zealots who do not want God in their lives. They are the same "air-heads" who had prayer removed from our schools and various public functions. They are the same class of people who are bringing all the filth to television, movies and smut publications, etc. It is my opinion that these anti-Christian, anti-God people are trying to send us down their road to moral destruction. God have mercy on all of us.
-- J.J. Aspinall, New Port Richey
If atheism were a religion
Re: Atheism is a religion, too, letter, Aug. 26.
Atheism has no dogma, no gods, no supernatural mumbo jumbo. Atheism is nothing more than lack of belief in a deity. Secularists aren't trying to force atheism on our government. But let's go with the letter writer's idea for a moment. Suppose atheists did want the pledge to say ". . . under no gods." And suppose we wanted our money to be inscribed with the phrase "In No Gods We Trust." And suppose we came up with some kind of atheist manifesto and insisted it be displayed in courtrooms across the country: "Ye shall have no gods . . . period." That would be ridiculous, wouldn't it? And it would horrify Christians.
Now you can imagine how people of other faiths, and no faith, feel whenever we come across Christianity's constant presence in our government. This is not a Christian nation. Christ is nowhere mentioned in our Constitution. We are a religiously diverse population and it's time Christians came to terms with that fact. One day, they may find themselves in the minority and then you can bet we'd hear cries for secularism like never before.
-- Dianna Narciso, Palm Bay
Out of place in public buildings
Re: Atheism is a religion, too, letter.
The question is not whether atheism is a religion but whether it would be appropriate for an atheist judge to put a plaque in a courthouse saying, "There is no god." This, like the Ten Commandments, has no place in public buildings. In addition, only three of the Ten Commandments have any counterpart in our Constitution and laws - 30 percent is not enough to say our laws are based on these commandments.
-- Gary Purcell, Tampa
Share your opinions
Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com or by fax to 893-8675.
They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number.
Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be published.
