Telecom giants battling

Ryan Pearson

Thursday, May 8, 2003 | 10:13 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- Big phone companies clashed at an Assembly hearing Wednesday over a proposal to prohibit Nevada from regulating broadband services like high-speed Internet.

The legislation requires state regulators to use a new rate-approval method that telecom giants SBC Communications and Sprint Corp. say would help them expand offerings and compete equally with others.

Competitors including AT&T have launched an ad campaign against the bill and told the Assembly Commerce and Labor Committee it would eventually increase costs for customers.

The measure, approved unanimously by the Senate, is nearly identical to SBC-backed legislation pending before lawmakers in Missouri, Indiana and several other states. It also allows billing for packaged services to include only one overall price, not costs of each part of the package or "unit" pricing.

Lawmakers delayed any vote on the measure after wading slowly into a complex discussion of telecom regulation. Several were skeptical that they could understand the issue quickly enough to vote on it before the end of the session.

"There's not a lot of time and it's too complicated," said Assemblywoman Dawn Gibbons, R-Reno.

Visibly confused committee members asked Nevada Public Utilities Commission analysts why they should make a decision -- whether to regulate broadband -- that is now left up to the commission. Nevada currently doesn't regulate broadband.

PUC Chairman Don Soderberg framed the bill as a question of "whether or not the current laws match up with the state of the industry," adding that the commission was "comfortable" with the measure.

Lobbyists for Sprint and SBC sparred with representatives of AT&T, WorldCom and XO Communications over the need for legislation.

"Today our hands are tied," said Sprint lobbyist Ann Pongracz in urging support for the bill. "Our competitors have the opportunity to tailor their offerings to meet the needs of customers, and we want to be able to do that too."

Dan Reaser of SBC, formerly Nevada Bell, added that the bill would level the playing field for former monopolies.

But John Frankovich, representing AT&T, urged lawmakers to leave the issue up to regulators. He said the bill "will substantially further deregulate both SBC and Sprint."

"Do we know whether we're ready to do that or not?"

Tim Hay, consumer advocate for Nevada utility customers, says the measure could put "upward pressure" on basic phone rates and strangle competition in the broadband market.

Commerce and Labor Chairman David Goldwater received a letter from a top Oklahoma lawmaker who regretted allowing similar legislation to pass in his state.

But the Las Vegas Democrat questioned whether the experiences of other states were relevant in Nevada. "It's not apples to apples," he said after the three-hour committee hearing.

Goldwater said he would request an exemption to allow SB400 to remain before his committee until the final days of the session, which ends June 2.