Hughesnet Community

FCC Chairman Plans to Expand Life Line Program to Internet

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Pawnee County
New Member

FCC Chairman Plans to Expand Life Line Program to Internet

I have never felt that Net Neutrality was a good ideal but I have to say, well, I did see this coming but some didn't think it could happen.  This is not meant in any way to be political and it is from a legitimate News Outlet.  I did think the first thing the FCC would do is submit the internet users to a USF and here it is being proposed.  Get ready to add 16.1% to your HughesNet Bill if this passes muster. 

Does it sound like a good deal now or not?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"(CNSNews.com) - Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler announced on Thursday that he intends to expand Lifeline, popularly known as the “Obama Phone” program, to the Internet.

“I am circulating new proposals to “reboot” Lifeline [1] for the Internet age,” Wheeler wrote [2] in a blog post on the FCC’s Website. He said the reboot would include “establishing minimum standards of service for voice and broadband,” in addition to subsidies for low-income consumers.

Lifeline is a government benefit program that provides [3] a monthly subsidy of $9.95 on telephone service for those at or below 135 percent of the poverty line so they can connect to the nation's communications networks, find jobs, access health care services, connect with family and their children's schools, and call for help in an emergency.

The money comes out of the Universal Service Fund (USF), which is funded through fees paid by consumers on telephone service.  The fee is generally itemized on customers’ monthly telephone bills and is currently assessed at a rate of 16.1 percent of the bill.

The size of the Lifeline program has doubled since 2008, increasing [4] from $819 million to $1.6 billion in 2014. It reached a high of $2.19 billion in 2012 amid allegations of fraud and abuse.

The USF, meanwhile, has increased [5] from $7.2 billion in 2008 to $10.34 billion in 2014, with Chairman Wheeler’s staff estimating a level of $12.1 billion in 2016. However, that estimate does not account for prospective Internet subsidies.
 

In his post, Wheeler said, “30 percent of Americans still haven’t adopted broadband at home.... While more than 95 percent of households with incomes over $150,000 have broadband, only 48 percent of those making less than $25,000 have service at home.”

According to Census Bureau data released [6] in September, 74 percent of Americans already have access to the Internet at home. Accounting for those who can access it at work, school, or public libraries, Pew Research found that just 15 percent of Americans reported not using the Internet at all.

Of the 15 percent who do not use the Internet, one-third said they had no desire to do so. “They are not interested, don't want to use it or don't need it,” Pew reported [7] in 2013. Overall, just 3 percent of Americans reported that they did not use the Internet due to financial reasons.

The Lifeline expansion was made possible largely through the FCC’s Open Internet Order, which reclassified Internet service as a utility and allows the FCC to impose the USF fee on Internet service if it chooses to do so.

The role of government in the Internet has already been likened to the ‘Obama Phone [8]’ program, with Rep. Marsha Blackburn saying in a statement [9], “The age of ObamaNet is upon us.”

The FCC is now seeking comment on how to modernize Lifeline “while further combatting waste and better targeting the program to those who need it most."

The FCC will vote on Wheeler’s proposal on June 18."
36 REPLIES 36
Liz
Moderator
Moderator

Hi Gary,

Thanks for sharing! Considering that this is just a proposal, and it has yet to be voted on, I wouldn't worry about any bill increases any time soon, but that's just my two cents.

-Liz
If you have a tech or billing question and need help, please start a new thread in the appropriate board. Unsolicited Private Messages may not get replies.

Slow performance? Click me!

Just to add an update to the Lifeline matter:

 

Hughes is not currently participating in the Lifeline Program and does not provide Lifeline Services.

If you have a tech or billing question and need help, please start a new thread in the appropriate board. Unsolicited Private Messages may not get replies.

Slow performance? Click me!

Pawnee County
New Member

I just don't trust the Government when they get their fingers around the cake there is always some icing missing afterword.
Ed3
New Member

     I say leave things as they are.



BirdDog
Assistant Professor

If it went into a pool to build overall internet infrastructure nationwide then I would be all for it. But targeted application then no.
I'm personally OK with "use" taxes like for roads, bridges and things for the common good.
We are way behind many other Western industrialized countries when it comes to broadband internet availability nation wide.
I do not believe in targeting poor areas only if there were such a "use" tax. Spread it out over the entire country for better internet. If we all pay we should all benefit.
There are many charitable organizations that will help people get connected to existing infrastructure. I know there are some that actually give disadvantaged kids very low cost notebooks that can connect to hot spots.
The problem is our internet infrastructure sucks.
Kind of like the government saying they are going to give poor people cars but then there are no roads to drive them on.
Once again, sounds like the cart before the horse to me.
Robin S
New Member

Having moved from an area that AT&T was given permission to buy a Baby Bell if they expanded their internet access to the more rural areas and as yet, have not done so ten years later. We would be better served if large entities, like AT&T, were forced to honor their contract or suffer some penalty. Enough of one that would allow municipalities to fulfill the contract that the company did not.

Ten years later all they're doing is making excuses. 

Also, having come from an area that the discounted satellite access was implemented, the cost was still very prohibited.
Pawnee County
New Member

I don’t want to sound cruel or non understanding nevertheless if someone has a Life Line Wired phone they can get Dial up for nothing to next to nothing.  I know it isn't broadband but to pay a bill or stay in touch via email it will work.  Myself if I could not afford HughesNet I never would have ordered it I would stick to the $17.00  dial up offered by my local phone company.  Or get 10 free hours with NetZero, then 10 free hours with Juno followed up with some more of the many free dial up isp's that are add driven.  It may be old technology but I don't expect anyone but myself to pay for the internet I use.  While the internet is convenient I do not see where it is a necessity.  A land line phone I do consider necessary for 911 etc and under curtain circumstances maybe a cellular but not internet. If I ever get into a financial scrape for some unforeseen reason the first thing to go is HughesNet, and second is Directv, I look at them as luxury items that can be replaced for free or with a lower priced substitution.
Robin S
New Member

Most of the time dial up no longer works for just email. They have added so much to sites that the speed of dial up just can not match up.

Too many companies have moved away from voice contact so that having a internet access is important. I had a T1 line and even that was too slow for most applications today.
Pawnee County
New Member

True but there are many Wi-Fi hotspots out there, local libraries offer internet, and if you are looking to fill out a job application the unemployment offices all over the country offer internet for job searches.  I just do not consider home internet a necessity just go to McDonalds get a cold iced tea and use the Wi-Fi.  I don't know if McDonalds has Wi-Fi or not but you get my drift.   
Robin S
New Member

What you're forgetting is that those that don't have access to internet other than land line also live miles outside of a town or city. It would take me 40 mins to drive to the nearest town. With gas prices hanging out at the 3$ mark that is an expensive proposition.

It is inconvenient and disruptive to have to climb in a vehicle to drive some where to access the internet. It is no longer a luxury, its now become a necessity with the way companies and governments are now doing business.

Hot spots are not inexpensive either. And you have to have a decent signal to even consider one. I use one and even though now I'm not so far outside of town my signal is not the best.
BirdDog
Assistant Professor

I have to agree, especially for the younger generations, the internet is a necessity if they want to be competitive professionally. Access at home is not a luxury for them.
Pawnee County
New Member

Yes I do I live 35 miles from Tulsa and 30 Miles from Stillwater with a few real small towns within 14 miles.  Now my Son lives 6 miles away he doesn't have internet at his place at all.  Sometime he has a need to get online for something, he either comes, to my house, or he'll call me, on the phone, and I'll look it up for him.  Internet is not a necessity.
Robin S
New Member

Tell that to my husband who lost his job during the financial collapse. He spent hours on the internet every day sending resume's and job applications since that was the only way employers were accepting them.

That is the reality of today's world. Dealing with large corporations means having open access to the internet. 

Are you suggesting he should have driven to our library 40 mins away every day to look for a job on the internet?
Pawnee County
New Member

No I am saying you had what you could afford at the time so good for you.  Now if it comes down internet or pay the rent, by all means pay the rent, or mortgage, there is always a way around the internet if need be.  Yes I spent many hours filling out online applications myself.  Likewise my Son needed to find another job and came by the house and used one of my PCs, my Daughter brought her Lap Top over and used my Wi-Fi for a search, there is a way, or an excuse, on any endeavour. 
Robin S
New Member

But you're suggesting that others should pay for service that is next to unusable since they can not afford what has become a necessity. Some how the two don't go together.

Your children are lucky you're close enough to offer them the service. Most situations none of the family has internet so their only option is to travel in to town.
Pawnee County
New Member

Hey Jezra I also wonder, "On a political side note: lifeline was started by Reagan, expanded by Bush, but it is referred to as "obamaphone". 🙂"

That is why I never use that term myself, but if it is in an article that I have copied I leave it there. I think it was the woman on some network can't remember which.  Who was yelling: "Obama gave me a phone he gave me a free phone, I got a ObamaPhone".  The thing went viral over the air and internet.
Pawnee County
New Member

Me neither I saw it on Fox News Channel, now I remember.
Thomas Ritter
New Member

If used the same way, the Lifeline program will be more of a subsidy to existing programs rather than establishing "special" Lifeline programs, and if that's the case the poor either will still do without it and make due, because they will state they cannot afford an additional expense. Now some companies will provide "lower tier" internet, but it doesn't qualify as "broadband" which I think the min req for BB is 25Mbps. So while the phone program works because there is a limited amount for usage despite the phone provided for free, broadband internet access would have to be similarly monitored and regulated. My other wonder is if BB is now considered any speeds over 25Mbps, then DSL cannot be considered broadband either, I've never seen a shared DSL/Phone line provide more than 5Mbps, or at least all the times I used to have DSL, I never got near that speed.
Pawnee County
New Member

Hey Thomas

I do agree with you; one thing most folks fail to mention,  Life Line Phones are outdated and only have talk and text, or, they are a land line.  Any other add ons, phones, Internet, or whatever they have to pay for.
C0RR0SIVE
Associate Professor

Sure someone mentioned it before...

In all honesty, I am against this for how they intend to use it.  But if such a system where we paid a small tax went to providing DSL expansion where no one has a wired infrastructure, I would be all for it...  But who expects AT&T, Verizon, and other DSL providers to actually do what they are supposed to do?