Letter: State must hold Nevada Bell to letter of law

Wednesday, May 23, 2001 | 8:40 a.m.

Recently the Las Vegas Sun published an article regarding the interest that SBC Telecom (a parent company of Nevada Bell) has in competing in the Nevada long distance market.

An SBC spokesperson stated that SBC Telecom plans servicing customers with long distance by April 2002. According to the article, an SBC official said an investigation into SBC Communications Inc.'s failure to provide accurate information to regulators about long distance service in the state of Oklahoma shouldn't block SBC from entering the Las Vegas market and expanding services.

Oh, really!

I am amazed at the blatant disregard that the telephone monopoly, SBC/Nevada Bell, has for its customers and apparently regulatory authorities. Even after SBC admits to providing inaccurate information -- which ultimately resulted in their gain -- it has the audacity to suggest that Nevadans won't hold them to the letter of the law and are already stating they will be in our market by April 2002.

I am not up on all the facets of the telecom industry, but according to the federal law, the local phone monopolies are supposed to relinquish their monopoly control over the local phone markets before looking to grab control of the long distance market.

As a small-business owner, as well as in my home service dealings, I am far too familiar with horror stories with our local phone monopoly, Sprint. I'm sure plenty of other Nevadans outside of Vegas have woes with Nevada Bell as well.

Hopefully in serving the best interests of Nevada consumers, our state regulators will hold Nevada Bell to the letter of the law to ensure we finally see a competitive local phone market. The lack of competition in this market is costing all of us.

MONIKA CZERWINSKI