Consumer Groups Troubled by Proposed AT&T-BellSouth Merger
If the FCC favors approval of the AT&T-BellSouth merger, it at least should set conditions aimed at guarding consumers, public interest groups said Wed. at a news conference listing their reasons for opposing the merger. Those reasons vary with each body’s membership.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The merger “can’t go forward while allegations are pending” about AT&T giving the National Security Agency access to customer records, Barry Steinhardt, dir.-ACLU’s Technology & Liberty Program, said. The FCC must investigate AT&T’s alleged ties to the NSA before approving the merger, he said. The FCC shouldn’t act on the merger until U.S. Dist. Judge Emmet Sullivan, D.C., finishes reviewing the earlier SBC-AT&T and Verizon-MCI mergers under the Tunney Act, Jeannine Kenney, Consumers Union senior policy analyst, said. Although Sullivan’s review focuses on DoJ’s merger approval, the FCC also has a role in the Tunney Act proceeding, Kenney said. In approving the earlier 2 mergers, Justice “relied in part on the FCC determination that the mergers were in the public interest,” Kenney said. FCC action on the AT&T-BellSouth merger would be “premature when it isn’t clear that federal regulators did their job in the last round of mergers,” she said.
Mark Cooper, Consumer Federation of America research dir., said he was worried about “the anticompetitive and anticonsumer impact of the merger” and called for conditions requiring naked DSL, net neutrality and special access that he said would affect consumers’ prices and choices. Answering a question, he said some of those conditions may be imposed, because the agency made similar requirements of previous mergers.
The merging partners will have a “tremendous amount of spectrum,” including “warehoused” spectrum new competitors could use, Media Access Project Pres. Andrew Schwartzman said. “This merger may be good for AT&T and BellSouth stockholders, but it can’t possibly be good for consumers,” NASUCA Exec. Dir. Charlie Acquard said, calling it a “$60 billion mistake.”
A proposed order FCC Chmn. Martin is circulating to fellow commissioners calls for approving the merger but doesn’t specify any conditions (CD Sept 25 p3). Sources at the agency said conditions may be added as a result of expected negotiations between Martin and other commissioners.
Soon after the draft order was publicized Fri., telecom competitors filed letters with the FCC urging the agency to add UNE and special access conditions if the agency approves the AT&T-BellSouth merger. In an ex parte letter filed late Fri., CompTel said it still opposes the merger; however, if the FCC is bent on approving it, the Commission should at least protect competitive access to loop and transport UNEs in AT&T and BellSouth regions.
In a separate letter also sent Fri., CompTel joined the Ad Hoc Telecom Users Committee, Mobile Satellite Ventures and Time Warner Telecom in seeking conditions to assure continued special access availability to competitors. A merged AT&T and BellSouth would have more “incentive and opportunity to raise rivals’ costs and, correspondingly, to increase retail prices for service for which special access services are a necessary input,” the groups said. “The UNE conditions, when taken in conjunction with remedies for access to special access services could help to offset, but not cure, the anticompetitive harms of the proposed merger,” CompTel said.
“There are always those who'll try to use these proceedings to peddle their personal bugaboos,” an AT&T spokesman said: “We're confident the FCC and DoJ recognize the significant public interest and consumer benefits of our merger.”