Proponents gather around regulatory framework for wireless

The wireless industry’s campaign for a national policy framework picked up more traction, with a group of state regulators and a key member of Congress taking steps bring uniformity to wireless regulation and consumer protection. But the fight over cellular regulatory jurisdiction is far from over.
At its winter meeting, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners’ telecom committee approved a resolution to set up a national set of wireless consumer standards that would be enforceable by states. A 1993 law pre-empts states from regulating mobile-phone rates and market entry, but leaves to states oversight of terms and conditions of wireless service. The reserve clause has prompted some states to pursue regulation of the wireless industry, and has made mobile-phone operators vulnerable to consumer lawsuits suits.
Meantime, House telecom subcommittee Chairman Edward Markey (D-Mass.) released a draft of a bill that would create new consumer safeguards for wireless subscribers’ and modify the existing jurisdictional regime without eviscerating state oversight of mobile-phone operators. The legislative draft would direct the Federal Communications Commission to initiate rulemakings on carrier disclosure of contract terms and charges, early termination fees, wireless service coverage maps, billing and service-quality monitoring.
A similar wireless consumer empowerment bill was introduced last year by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va).
Cellular industry association CTIA has lobbied in past years for a national regulatory framework, one that further limits the role of states along the lines as that included in a bill sponsored by Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.).
“We want to be part of the process. We want to be collaborative. We want to work with you, not against you,” said CTIA President Steve Largent in a speech to NARUC’s telecom committee. He added: “We don’t think it’s in our consumers’ interests to have four sets of rules in Delaware and 10 sets of rules in California and three sets of rules in Oklahoma.”
Largent said a patchwork of wireless regulations adds costs to subscribers’ bills, and that industry is anxious to debate what a national regulatory framework should look like.
However, it is unclear how much leverage industry will have in shaping federal legislation. The legal and political landscapes are not necessarily optimal for cellular carriers. Last month, the Supreme Court rejected a request by Sprint Nextel Corp. and T-Mobile USA Inc. to review a lower court’s decision overturning an FCC rule that pre-empted state regulation of line-items on subscribers’ monthly bills. Expanding federal preemption would have to pass muster with Democrats, who control Congress and want to put one of their own in the White House in 2009.