George Cunningham (Democrat, Clean Elections Candidate, 2 Year Seat, http://www.cunningham2002.com/)
(about George Cunningham...)

First, I agree with the goals of Universal Service mandated by Congress in the 1996 Telecommunications Reform Act. These goals are to: promote the availability of quality services at just, reasonable and affordable rates; and increase access to advanced telecommunications services to all consumers, including those in low income, rural, insular and high cost areas. My definition, then, of Universal Service would require access and availability of services to accomplish these goals.

The Universal Service Fund can help bridge the Digital Divide by providing assistance to "at risk" populations so they can gain access to telecommunications services.

The Commission's existing Universal Service Fund is targeted to high cost areas. The rules pertaining to the implementation of this fund should be re-written to streamline the process under which high-cost providers can obtain access to the fund and to consider extending application of the fund to competitive companies willing to provide advanced services to a broad range of consumers.

Additionally, as my answer to the prior question indicates, the Commission should also design and implement public information programs to inform, educate and assist consumers in taking advantage of federal and state programs that exist to help low-income individuals gain access to telecommunications services.

Mike (Lowell) Gleason (Republican, Clean Elections Candidate, 2 Year Seat)
(about Mike (Lowell) Gleason...)

The ACC policies should embrace market driven solutions. Government intrusion into the market stifles competition and generates more government intrusion. The universal Service Fund should be used to foment the development of telecommunications to groups of people not to individuals. A general fund welfare program should fund individuals who need assistance to have voice communications.

Jeff Hatch-Miller (Republican, Clean Elections Candidate, 2 Year Seat, http://www.hatch-miller.org/)
(about Jeff Hatch-Miller...)

Historically, Universal Service has referred the policy of ensuring that basic services are available to everyone who wants them. It may refer to health, education, telephone, electricity, or any number of other services considered essential to quality of life by the proponents.

In Arizona there is a small fee (or tax) of about two cents on our telephone bill that goes into a fund to provide Arizona citizens in remote rural areas with access to basic local exchange telephone service (voice grade line with touch tone capability plus directory listing, 911, information, and accommodation for hearing handicapped and speech impaired). In essence, the fund subsidizes the cost of providing services in areas where population is low and thus cost of providing services is higher than in more densely populated urban centers. For Arizona's rural telephone consumers this has meant, in essence, that a portion of their bill is paid by the fund.

The fund contains about $1 million dollars annually, most of which is dispersed to Citizens Telephone in the White Mountains and Midvail Telephone (operating in several parts of the state.) Few companies apply for the funds because they are presently required to make application through an cumbersome and expensive rate case. One improvement that the Commission can make is to provide a less onerous means of applying for Universal Services Fund support.

We can consider subsidized residential rates and free inbound calls another benefit. The FCC has gone further and offers universal service support to: (1) telecommunications carriers in rural, insular, and high cost areas, where telecommunications services are often more expensive to provide; (2) low-income consumers, through the Lifeline program (which provides monthly reductions in service charges) and Link Up program (which provides reductions in initial connection charges); and (3) schools, libraries, and rural health care providers.

There are still regions of Arizona that have poor basic telephone service. My priority would be to complete the process of ensuring quality voice connections. Once that is achieved, we should look toward improving service such that data quality connections are obtained statewide.

Jim Irvin (Republican, Clean Elections Candidate, 4 Year Seat, http://www.jimirvin.org/)
(about Jim Irvin...)

The definition of Universal Service, in the context of the Arizona Universal Service Fund ("AUSF"), is the development of infrastructure to bring service to under-served areas within Arizona. The biggest obstacle to bringing advanced telecommunication services to areas where they are not currently available is the cost of infrastructure. Under this definition, funds should be available for the deployment of these services to these areas. Of course, the AUSF can only play a limited role in this endeavor, but even now it is tremendously under-utilized. While on the Commission, I will continue to encourage any telecommunications provider interested in deploying services (including advanced services) to utilize the AUSF in conjunction with its other funding sources.

Roland James (Democrat, Clean Elections Candidate, 2 Year Seat, http://www.rolandjames.org/)
(about Roland James...)

"Universal Service" for telecomm now means that a high (specific % is debatable) percentage of residences have local basic landline phone service. "Universal Service" for advanced telecomm services is beyond the scope of regulatory bodies until the overall society decides to become more egalitarian.

I don't know that the Universal Service Fund, as presently constituted, can even begin to bridge the Digital Divide. If "universal service" is to begin to mean access to the Internet, for example, then the Universal Service program would have to be greatly expanded. I'm willing to look at this.

James Walsh (Democrat, Clean Elections Candidate, 4 Year Seat, http://www.jamespwalsh.com/)
(about James Walsh...)

Congress included Universal Service in the 1996 Telecommunications Reform Act. The purpose of Universal Service is to ensure access and availability of resources to all consumers, including those in low income, rural, insular and high-cost areas.

To me, "Universal Service" means availability of quality, affordable services and widespread access to basic telecommunications services, like local phone service. But even as we're working to guarantee these services to everyone, we see technological advances raising the bar on what is considered "basic." Internet access has become a basic tool and broadband is now widely available in urban areas, but consumers in rural areas don't have the same kinds of choices when it comes to these services.

The Corporation Commission can play a key role in bridging this digital divide. The Commission should consider the expansion of the Universal Service Fund so that services are available across various social, cultural, geographic and economic groups and so that all consumers are able to access basic and advanced telecommunications services at affordable rates.