As Californians know too well, wildfires, earthquakes, and other disasters pose an enormous risk to life and property, and nothing is more essential in keeping people safe than a reliable and resilient communications system.
Nevertheless, a bill moving through the Legislature would preclude the state from guaranteeing essential and reliable communications services to all Californians. Assembly Bill (AB) 1366 does this by extending an existing 2012 law scheduled to come off the books next January that prohibits the state from regulating Internet-based phone service.
When that law was passed, its aim was to encourage development of the telecommunications technology known as VOIP, for Voice Over Internet Protocol. The law did its job. VOIP has flourished. It is now the industry’s dominant technology, whether consumers know it or not.
The timing of the bill could not be more ill-advised. Under the Trump Administration, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has abdicated its role of ensuring access to affordable, fair, and reliable Internet and communications services. Yet here we are in California, proposing to eliminate all state jurisdiction on the false assumption that the FCC and free-market competition will ensure that all Californians and emergency responders have a communications system they can rely on.
The truth is, hundreds of thousands of our residents have no high-speed broadband access, and a third of Californians — some 4.2 million households — do not benefit from any competition at all.
Contrary to what the legislation’s supporters in the telecommunications industry and elsewhere contend, this bill is not about stifling innovation or popular VOIP apps like Skype or Facetime. This bill gives free rein to telecommunications companies such as AT&T and Comcast and allows them to behave however they choose, even when it’s antithetical to the public’s interest and safety. If this bill becomes law, it will be these companies alone, rather than responsible government oversight, that determine their sense of social responsibility and decide:
- Whether the companies participate in universal service programs such as LifeLine that help the poor pay their bills. AT&T, for instance — the state’s largest carrier — has decreased participation by 90 percent in the last decade.
- Which communities receive next-generation technology investments like fiber, 5G, and 10G.
- Whether and how quickly infrastructure is repaired or upgraded in poor and rural communities.
- Whether telecommunications providers address complaints from local governments.
- Whether wildfire and disaster resiliency are built into their core infrastructure.
- Whether service is reliable and redundant, so all Californians can reach a 911 dispatcher whenever they need to.
- Whether they coordinate with utilities such as Pacific Gas & Electric Company and local governments to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters.
There are too many communities in high fire hazard zones with real concerns that they will be the next Santa Rosa or Paradise, where wildfires swept through with deadly results. We need to know and be able to require their communications networks to have adequate backup power, defensible space around cell towers, and redundant signal-moving connections known as “backhaul.” We need tools to ensure that telecommunications companies have adequate emergency preparedness plans. And we must identify, strengthen, and protect the vulnerable parts of our networks, because employing temporary facilities on wheels or wings when disaster strikes is always too little, too late.
At the CPUC and the California Office of Emergency Services, we have been working on multiple fronts to advance preparedness and public safety. But whether we’re seeking consumer protections for disaster victims, requiring utilities to prepare for emergencies and response, or developing protocols for proactive power shutoffs during extreme weather conditions, this bill ties the state’s hands. AB 1366 makes it much harder for first responders to do their jobs and help keep people safe.
We know telecommunications infrastructure is failing in our state. A CPUC staff analysis also featured in this newsletter, for instance, shows that — deliberate or not — AT&T’s investment policies have favored higher-income communities and have thus had a disproportionate impact upon the state’s lowest-income areas. Network hubs serving areas with the lowest household incomes have the highest trouble report rates, the longest outages, the lowest percentages of outages cleared within 24 hours, and the longest times required to fix 90 percent of service outages. The opposite is true for the highest-income communities.
Sensible regulation is necessary to make sure Californians have a reliable and resilient communications system. AB 1366 would continue to prevent the modernization and development of protections all Californians need, and it should be defeated.
