2005 Senate Bill 754

Re-write expiring Michigan Telecommunication Act

Introduced in the Senate

Sept. 13, 2005

Introduced by Sen. Cameron Brown (R-16)

To streamline the process by which telephone markets are deemed to be “competitive” and state regulations are therefore substantially reduced, and revise some of the provisions of that substantially reduced regulatory regime.

Referred to the Committee on Technology and Energy

Sept. 29, 2005

Reported without amendment

With the recommendation that the substitute (S-5) be adopted and that the bill then pass.

Oct. 11, 2005

Substitute offered

To adopt a new version of the bill that would replace the expiring Michigan Telecommunications Act with a new law that limits the regulation of retail rates to an "essential basic" residential plan of 200 calls per month. The new law would still include consumer protections such as bans on “slamming” and “cramming,” etc. The substitute was amended in a series of voice votes to expand the features of the price-regulated "essential basic" calling plan; to allow small businesses to opt for that plan; to authorize PSC to determine whether to allow "end user line charges" (EUCL) within the basic rate structure; to add additional "consumer protection" regulations; and to clarify some other provisions.

The substitute passed by voice vote

Amendment offered by Sen. Mark Schauer (D-19)

To allow a customer who agrees to accept the price-controlled "essential basic" phone service to nevertheless add additional features to this service without having to then go to an unregulated service package.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Virg Bernero (D-23)

To expand the scope of Michigan's telephone industry regulation to include cell phones.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Virg Bernero (D-23)

To expand the scope of Michigan's telephone industry regulation to include cell phones, and require cell phone companies to give customers service coverage maps and to provide various disclosures to prospective customers.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Virg Bernero (D-23)

To expand the scope of Michigan's telephone regulation to cell phones, and require cell phone companies give customers estimates of the total monthly cost of particular call plans.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Virg Bernero (D-23)

To expand the scope of Michigan's telephone regulation to cell phones, and prohibit cell phone contract cancellation charges of more than $20.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Virg Bernero (D-23)

To expand the scope of Michigan's telephone regulation to cell phones, and give cell phone customers a 20-day "recission" period in which they can exit a contract they have signed without any penalty.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Virg Bernero (D-23)

To expand the scope of Michigan's telephone industry regulation to include cell phones, and to require cell phone companies to provide 24-hour toll free help lines with live operators on duty at all times.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Liz Brater (D-18)

To prohibit providers of the regulated "essential basic" from seeking more than one rate increase in a 12 month period.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Gilda Jacobs (D-14)

To eliminate a provision requiring both phone companies in a wholesale service provision dispute to agree before it can be referred to an "alternative dispute resolution" process (such as binding arbitration), and allow just one party to trigger the alternative process. This would only apply to disputes involving smaller dollar amounts.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Gilda Jacobs (D-14)

To expand the scope of Michigan's telephone industry regulation to include cell phones, and to require cell phone companies to notify each customer at least 30 days before his or her service contract expires.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Ray Basham (D-8) and four co-sponsors

Co-sponsored by Sens. Deborah Cherry (D-26), Michael Prusi (D-38), Gilda Jacobs (D-14) and Jim Barcia (D-31)

To extend "cramming" prohibitions to include unregulated (non-basic) phone service. "Cramming" is adding features to a customer's service plan (an bill) that the customer did not specifically request.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Virg Bernero (D-23)

To give the PSC authority to rule in interconnection agreement disputes between phone companies. Note: Current federal law generally covers interconnection issues.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Virg Bernero (D-23)

To prohibit a phone company from selling a service to another phone company at a price that is not less than its retail price.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Dennis Olshove (D-9)

To not automatically move a customer who makes more than 200 calls in a month out of the "essential basic" service contract, but instead require phone companies to seek PSC approval for a regulated rate that applies to the excess calls.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Virg Bernero (D-23)

To give the PSC authority to rule in disputes between phone companies.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Ray Basham (D-8) and four co-sponsors

Co-sponsored by Sens. Deborah Cherry (D-26), Michael Prusi (D-38), Gilda Jacobs (D-14) and Jim Barcia (D-31)

To extend "slamming" prohibitions to include unregulated (non-"essential basic") phone service. "Slamming" is transferring a customer from one service provider to another without a specific request from the customer to do so.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Liz Brater (D-18)

To require cell phone and Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) phone service providers to provide 9-1-1 service.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Liz Brater (D-18)

To require phone companies to include in service contracts which entity is responsible for repair and service issues, including contact information.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Dennis Olshove (D-9)

To in effect repeal a PSC determination made in the summer of 2005 that the Detroit and Southeast Michigan local phone service market is "competitive," and therefore that local phone companies serving that region are exempt from a wide variety of regulations intended for markets controlled by a "monopoly." The amendment would have the effect of re-regulating the local phone market in this region.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Martha G. Scott (D-2)

To make more explicit certain "consumer protection" provisions that require phone companies to use fair and open practices in dealing with consumers.

Consideration postponed

Amendment offered by Sen. Virg Bernero (D-23)

To require phone companies to use their current interconnection agreements as a baseline document for negotiating new agreements with other phone companies, and place the burden on the company requesting a change to demonstrate in any arbitration procedure why this is necessary.

Consideration postponed

Motion by Sen. Ken Sikkema (R-28)

To "blow up" the re-write of the expiring Michigan Telecommunication Act (as some press reports described it), by adopting <i>en masse</i> all the Senate floor amendments described on the <a href="http://www.michiganvotes.org/2005-SB-754">main page of this bill</a>. Allowing the unchecked alteration of the bill undermined the extensive negotiations and committee work that had resulted in the bill described on that main page as the "substitute offered in the Senate." Sen. Sikkema, who is the Senate Majority Leader, told reporters that many of the amendments sponsored by Democrats were intended to generate roll call votes that would cast Republican opponents as “anti-consumer.” Consequently, he was sending the "blown up" bill to the House in hopes that it "makes decisions based on policy as opposed to politics.” The final version of the legislation is likely to crafted by a House-Senate conference committee after the House passes its version of a new telecom law. This “conference report” would then be subject to an up-or-down vote without amendment. If no bill is passed before Dec. 31, 2005, then all phone service would become unregulated in Michigan beginning Jan. 1, 2006.

The motion passed 38 to 0 (details)

Passed in the Senate 38 to 0 (details)

To replace the Michigan Telecommunications Act, which expires at the end of 2005, with a new Act consisting of the substitute offered in the Senate on Oct. 11, 2005, and the 21 amendments the Senate adopted <i>en masse</i> that day. The result is a proposed law that observers on all sides of the issue agree would contain many irreconcilable contradictions and inconsistencies. For example, it would deregulate some types of phone service in some areas of the state but not in others, and expands the scope of Michigan's telephone industry regulation to include cell phones. See the <a href="http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=175027">Sikkema motion</a> for an explanation.

Motion by Sen. Ken Sikkema (R-28)

Consideration postponed

Received in the House

Oct. 12, 2005

Referred to the Committee on Energy and Technology