Nearly every week, phone companies like Frontier Communications are confronted with service outages that turn out to be more than just an errant gunshot that disrupted 911 service for hundreds of residents in Moses Lake, Washington.  When repair crews arrive to find no cabling to repair, they realize it’s yet another case of copper theft — a problem plaguing economically challenged areas across the country.

Unfortunately for phone companies, copper theft remains a misdemeanor in many states, including West Virginia, one of the hardest hit by wire thieves that literally strip phone lines right off the phone poles as they drive by in the dead of night.

An employee with Frontier Communications reported that on June 25 he received reports that the phone lines were out for residents along Paddle Creek Road near Fort Gay, W.V.

It apparently took two days for the employee to discover, on June 27, 800 feet of phone cable had been removed from a wooded area along the road. The value of the cable was estimated at $10,000.  The annoyance value for customers left without basic phone service?  Potentially more.

In St. Albans, nearly 400 Frontier customers were stripped of their landline service Friday when vandals cut a cable in a possible theft attempt.  Frontier said the most vulnerable cables are often in the most remote and rural locations, and this cable qualified, requiring more than a day to repair and restore service.

But the impact of copper theft can be greater than phone service knocked out for a few hundred residents.  In Kanawha County, West Virginia’s Department of Agriculture offices were left idle when the second copper theft in two months left their phone lines dead.

“We’re at a standstill,” said Gus Douglass, commissioner of agriculture. “It’s kind of ridiculous.”

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WSAZ Huntington Copper Thieves Dep Ag 6-28-11.mp4[/flv]

WSAZ-TV in Huntington, W.V. covered the second straight outage of phone service for the West Virginia Dept. of Agriculture in two months.  Copper thieves do strike twice in the same place.  (2 minutes)

Frontier has complained that because copper thefts are often treated as a misdemeanor, offenders are skating with a small fine and little or no jail time.  That makes repeat offenses likely, and risks for those just getting into the copper racket low.

Thieves are reselling the stolen copper for money.  Copper has become a hot commodity, and thieves often earn hundreds, if not thousands of dollars, for a night’s work.

Frontier believes strengthening criminal penalties for copper thefts will do more to deter would-be thieves more than installing surveillance equipment.

Kanawha County Prosecutor Mark Plants seems to agree.  His office is now charging offenders under a little-used state code that makes it a felony to disrupt telephone service.  A felony conviction can bring substantial fines and multi-year prison sentences, especially for repeat offenders.

“There is a push […] towards maximizing a prison sentence for all of these criminals,” Plants told WSAZ-TV.

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WSAZ Huntington Copper Thieves 6-29-11.mp4[/flv]

WSAZ-TV follows up on the copper theft outage that plagued the West Virginia Dept. of Agriculture with news of an arrest, and a demand for stronger penalties for copper thieves.  (2 minutes)

AT&T’s record of delivering reliable landline service has remained an open question for Bakersfield, Calif. residents for more than six months, as repeated outages leave several AT&T landline customers without access to a dial tone.  Even worse, some of the customers impacted have been left without any phone service for weeks on end, including one woman whose life literally depends on a working phone.

Andrea Williams, who lives alone in her Bakersfield home, suffered a stroke and has a heart condition — making access to a phone absolutely essential to her well-being.  Williams is also legally blind, making a cell phone an insurmountable challenge.  Instead, Williams says she has memorized the location of the buttons on her long-standing cordless landline phone, a phone that was out of service just after Christmas and largely stayed that way for three weeks.

Despite having made numerous calls to AT&T trying to get the problem corrected, Williams says no one from AT&T ever showed up.  It took an investigative report from Bakersfield’s KGET-TV newsroom to finally get AT&T to respond.

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KGET Bakersfield ATT Phone Lines Crossed 12-29-10 and 1-10-11.flv[/flv]

Back in December, AT&T in Bakersfield left hundreds of customers without service or cross-connected with other customers’ phone lines.  It all culminated three weeks later in one health-challenged resident breaking out in tears when local TV station KGET finally helped get her service restored.  (5 minutes)

Fast forward to late June, and AT&T’s reliability is again up for a challenge, as some residents in the unincorporated community of Glennville, 30 miles north of Bakersfield, are fed up with repeated outages, even after eight families collectively paid $16,000 to AT&T to extend wired phone service and broadband to their neighborhood.

Around the same time Williams was experiencing problems with her phone line in December, residents in Glennville began experiencing repeated outages of their own.

“I think from December to January, it was 15 times it went out,” said resident Ray Schill.  “From February to now, [the lines have been out] another 10-15 times.”

Residents in Glennville are especially concerned because they cannot count on their landlines, and cell service is spotty to non-existent in the area.

“My major concern is we’re going to have a big problem up here — someone is going to be ill, we’re going to have a fire, someone’s going to die — who is liable,” Kathryn Ervin, a Glennville resident told KGET News.

What happens when residents call AT&T for help?

We get the runaround, says Schill, with promises extending through the months of May, June, and now July 15.

Schill doesn’t hold much confidence in AT&T’s promises, especially after the company responded to an inquiry from the state’s Public Utilities Commission which culminated in his complaint being closed-as-resolved.

Once again, KGET-TV was on the case for the benefit of its viewers, and reporter Kelsey Thomas received a remarkable response from AT&T — the company “couldn’t handle the number of people using the phones in Glennville.” (population: 280)

The company promises to “upgrade its software” to resolve the problem, but could not give Thomas a time frame for when that would be complete.

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KGET Bakersfield Folks in Glennville fed up with ATT 6-27-11.mp4[/flv]

KGET-TV gets involved with AT&T once again, this time to help hundreds of residents of Glennville, Calif., who are also experiencing trouble with the company’s landline service.  (3 minutes)

When Stop the Cap! reader Nancy learned earlier this year AT&T was pushing yet another deregulation bill in the Michigan legislature allowing the company to abandon landline service if and when it chooses, she called AT&T and her state representatives to protest.

“When I called AT&T, the representative literally told me if the company ever did decide to stop offering basic phone service in Michigan, I should just ‘get a cell phone,'” Nancy reports.  “Naturally they tried to sell me one of theirs and I replied I was not likely to be loyal to a company that was willing to abandon me and hundreds of thousands of other rural customers.”

As in Wisconsin, AT&T’s lobbying efforts follow the same basic playbook: use friendly legislators and dollar-a-holler groups financed in part by AT&T to push deregulation as “improving competition” and making the state “business friendly.”  But as Nancy learned from experiences in Wisconsin, those are empty promises when rates go up.

“These same people pushed to deregulate cable in Wisconsin so they could offer AT&T’s cable TV service, promising lower prices if we had AT&T competing against Time Warner Cable,” Nancy remembers.  “Time Warner and AT&T raised their rates for both services, instead.”

Nancy has a good memory.  So do we.  Yet again, AT&T’s chief Astroturfer is Thad Nation, this time under the name of the Midwest Consumers for Choice and Competition.  While consumers get ignored, Nation gets time to testify before the House Energy and Technology Committee.

Nation, who runs a lobbying firm, told legislators companies like AT&T should not have to invest in old copper-lines that consumers don’t care about.  He claims it prevents AT&T and other companies from investing in broadband and wireless.

In reality, legislation pushed by AT&T will allow them and other phone companies to abandon providing even basic landline service in the rural areas they no longer care about. There is no evidence (and no regulation) AT&T will invest in either broadband or improved wireless service in rural areas where the company is unlikely to quickly recoup its investment.

Our friends at the Michigan Telephone Blog pointed us to a piece in the Huron Daily Tribune, a newspaper at ground zero for rural Michigan’s potential loss of landline service should the deregulation bill pass.

Located in Michigan’s “thumb” — the northeastern part of the state separated by Saginaw Bay, Tribune reporters drilled down into the implications for the loss of traditional landline service in this largely-rural area of Michigan.

Huron County Commissioner John Bodis, who chairs the Legislative Committee, said he’s aware of the bill and foresees some issues with it, particularly in regard to the provision allowing phone companies to discontinue landline service in an area where Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) or cell phone service is available.

“If it’s not mandated, they’re not going to do it,” he said. “So, I’m hoping the Senate version will tweak that a little bit and hold their feet to the fire, but I don’t know.”

In its May Capitol Currents, the Michigan Township Association reported its concerns center around residents losing their land-line phone services when other options are not adequate (i.e. poor cell phone coverage because of hills, trees, etc.).

In written testimony to the House Energy and Technology Committee, Brian Groom, president of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1106, stated over the past decade, the Michigan Legislature has gradually removed telecommunications providers from the oversight of the MPSC, and HB 4314 would complete that process by eliminating the last vestige of regulation — the Primary Basic Local Exchange Service.

“This service, as currently mandated in state statute, requires residential service providers to offer — at the very least — a basic calling plan to customers in their service territory,” Groom stated. “In 2005, when (M)PSC regulation of larger calling plans was eliminated, proponents argued that the public would continue to be protected by the existence of a Primary Basic Local Exchange Service requirement.”

“This means telecommunication companies providing basic local exchange or toll service will be able to discontinue or deny service to any customer who has access to ‘a comparable voice service.’ Nothing in the bill ensures that such service would be affordable, reliable or of a minimum quality,” Grooms continued. “For customers living in remote areas which are of a higher cost to serve via landlines, this legislation could result in them having to depend on higher cost and less reliable forms of telecommunication services. This bill would create a telecommunications environment where large areas of the state have no access at all to traditional landline telephone service.”

“That means people like me and my friends in places like Bad Axe, Elmwood, and Minden City — communities few people outside of Michigan would have heard of, get disconnected because they are too rural to get much attention from these companies,” Nancy says.

Frontier Communications, which provides service in some areas of the state, claims monopolies don’t exist in the phone business:

In written testimony, Bob Stewart, Frontier Communications state director of governmental affairs for Michigan and Indiana, indicated the current atmosphere is no conducive toward monopolies.

“The telecommunications industry in Michigan has moved to a highly competitive environment where monopoly powers even in rural areas do not exist,” he stated. “Unneeded and outdated regulations in the Michigan Telecommunications Act are cleaned up by HB 4314. Michigan needs to celebrate the success of the MTA by declaring victory; not over regulating simply for the sake of regulation.”

But many rural Michigan residents far from cable television and strong signal cell phone service would beg to differ.

“The further inland you head on the ‘thumb,’ the worse things get,” Nancy reports.  “Much of this is farm country and they can’t even get DSL service, and cell reception might be barely adequate outside, but walk inside and your signal is gone.”

Despite consumers like Nancy getting upset when they learn the long term implications of these bills, without a public outcry it is easy for legislators to vote with AT&T.  In the House, HB 4314 passed 102-6.  The six standouts that stood up for consumers?

Reps. Vicki Barnett (D-Farmington Hills, Jeff Irwin (D-Ann Arbor), Steven Lindberg (D-Marquette), Lesia Liss (D-Warren), Edward McBroom (R-Vulcan) and Phil Potvin (R-Cadillac).

AT&T stands to benefit enormously from the latest attempt to deregulate telecommunications services that could leave rural Michigan residents without a phone line, strips consumer protection and oversight rules to protect ratepayers, and wipes out the state Public Service Commission’s (PSC) traditional role of arbitrating telephone service and billing disputes.  In short, it delivers all of the benefits to AT&T and hangs up on Michigan consumers when their telephone service goes wrong.

AT&T  has found a real friend in Rep. Ken Horn (R-Frankenmuth), who introduced H.4314, a bill to overhaul Michigan’s telecommunications law.  Horn is AT&T’s top recipient of political contributions made by the company (and its employees) in the Michigan House.  He’s the third largest recipient of phone company money in the state, according to records from Project Vote Smart.  Horn’s bill delivers absolutely no discernible benefits to Michigan ratepayers.  Instead, Christmas comes early for big phone companies as Horn’s bill fulfills a wish list drawn up to eliminate decades of consumer-friendly protections:

1. Eliminates the PSC’s annual report on telecom competition and rate fairness in Michigan;
2. Allows AT&T to stop cooperating with the PSC in supplying information to help produce said report;
3. Strips away the requirement that companies like AT&T keep proper records that show the costs of delivering their services to customers;
4. Allows companies to keep secret the rates for services delivered by contract;
5. Eliminates the requirement that companies like AT&T deliver “high quality basic local service” to all residents in the state;
6. Expires all service quality standards established by the Commission on June 30, 2011;
7. Allows companies to escape punishment by eliminating the PSC’s authority to issue fines, cease and desist orders, or revocation of service licenses when a company has violated state law;
8. Requires all parties in a mediated dispute to keep the outcome secret;
9. Eliminates state-mandated fair billing practices;
10. Permits AT&T and other companies to sell, lease, or otherwise transfer assets and sell service to an affiliate below cost;
11. Allows companies to discriminate in favor of an affiliated burglar and fire alarm service over a similar service offered by another provider;
12. Eliminates the requirement that companies provide each customer a clear and simple explanation of the terms and conditions of services purchased by the customer and a statement of all fees, charges, and taxes that will be included in the customer’s monthly bill.
13. Allows AT&T and other providers to market products and services without giving the customer a true and fair estimate of the real “out the door” price for service — after taxes, fees, and surcharges.
14. Allows AT&T and other phone companies to discontinue service in any area provided with anything resembling a two-way telecommunications service including wireless, radio, or Voice Over IP service;
15. Eliminates the telecommunication relay service advisory board, which ensures quality service to the hard of hearing and deaf communities;
16. Reduces privacy guideline requirements protecting customers.

In tandem with Horn’s bill, AT&T released a congratulatory brochure reminding legislators they got the first half of their agenda enacted six years ago, now it is time for the rest of their dreams to come true.

Calling the proposed bill part of  “an innovation agenda to ‘modernize’ Michigan’s Telecommunications Act,” AT&T characterized the legislation as the ultimate red tape cutter, eliminating “a rotary phone mentality in a Smartphone, Wi-Fi world.”

Innovation, AT&T Style

But the proposed bill goes well beyond eliminating what AT&T considers outdated regulations and old phones — it could also eliminate phone service to Michigan’s most rural communities.

President Barack Obama was in Michigan last month to promote expanding broadband service, particularly in sparsely covered communities in the upper peninsula.  Large sections of Michigan remain underserved by AT&T, who does not extend DSL service into many rural areas.  Nothing in AT&T’s reform measure will bring broadband to these areas.  In fact, the bill grants AT&T permission to abandon landline service to these areas altogether, taking the prospects for DSL with it.

By winning an unrestrained playground for its products and services, for which it can charge whatever it likes — AT&T will follow Verizon’s lead and enhance service through its U-verse platform in urban and wealthy areas of the state at the expense of rural areas which are deemed unprofitable to serve.  While that’s great news for AT&T’s profit and loss statement, it hardly benefits the residents of Michigan who have helped build AT&T’s enormous network with decades of bill payments.

AT&T has a different position, of course. The phone company claims the bill will “better serve consumers” by eliminating “non-productive investments,” which really means investments in a landline network many Americans in more urban areas don’t care about anymore.  AT&T has focused much of its attention on its wireless network, which can deliver benefits to residents in Ann Arbor, Detroit, Saginaw and Grand Rapids, but is hardly a broadband replacement for Marquette or Elk Rapids — not with that 2GB monthly usage cap.  For urban dwellers, the promise of AT&T U-verse replacing AT&T DSL makes the phone company relevant in the broadband marketplace once again, but at the potential price of rural Michigan, who will never see the service in their neck of the woods.

AT&T claims their telecom reform agenda “means putting up a sign that says we are a state that gets it and will welcome and not restrain innovation,” the company says. “20th century regulations stand in the way of 21st century technology. Now is the opportunity to clear these roadblocks to investment and innovation.”

But AT&T’s policy bulldozer does far more than just sweeping away so-called “outdated” regulations.  It strips away fundamental consumer protection from unfair rate hikes, deteriorating phone service, billing errors, privacy protection, and the most basic right Americans have counted on for decades — the opportunity to purchase affordable landline service in even the most rural parts of the state.

Unfortunately, AT&T’s “innovation agenda” is deregulation at a price.  In Ohio, after similar legislation was passed, AT&T promptly raised rates on consumers last summer.  They did the same thing in California.  And Illinois.  Even U-verse, while delivering a second option for urban residents, simply does not save most subscribers money, especially after the introductory promotional rate expires.  It comes with rate hikes itself.

The Michigan Telephone Blog analyzes most of the bill’s outcomes with the same skeptical eye we have, and delivers a warning to other phone companies and businesses that could pay the price for AT&T’s version of “reform”:

If you are with a CLEC, an alarm company, or really any business that depends on telecommunications service in Michigan, you probably should have your legal department and/or your tariff guys looking at this bill.  If you belong to any type of consumer or business organization, especially one that protects senior citizens (who often hang onto the older technology, including the phone service they’ve always used) or small businesses (that often can’t move to other technologies for various reasons, particularly when they are located in less densely-populated areas), you should probably take a close look at this bill as well.

When is a rate increase not just a rate increase?  When it’s also “an attractive offer.”

Frontier Communications is getting heat from consumers in Fort Wayne, Ind., with news their Frontier FiOS TV bill will skyrocket $12-30 higher in the coming month.

To distract from the disaster-in-the-making, Frontier representatives are waving shiny keys to customers preparing to depart, trying to “upgrade” Indiana residents back to satellite TV.

Don Banowetz, president of Frontier’s Midwest division, told Fort Wayne customers he was personally excited by the satellite offer, because customers can get free programming services for the remainder of 2011, a $700 value according to Banowetz.

“It’s not just a price increase, it’s an offer — a quite attractive offer,” Banowetz told INC Now.

Frontier is also pitching a free 32-inch “web-capable” digital television for customers signing an extended length contract.

Frontier says these televisions are going to revolutionize the way Americans watch TV over the next five years, and they believe their offer will be well-received by customers.

Not so much.

“I’ll bet their letter will leave out the part about how Frontier rations the Internet to their customers,” writes Fort Wayne resident Irv, who has been closely following Frontier’s Internet Overcharging antics in the Sacramento area.  “Will the coin slot be on the top or side of their television, because after you start watching, you’ll have to start paying.”

Frontier has sent letters to customers in Minnesota and California demanding up to $250 a month for residential broadband access because they used the company’s DSL service “too much.”

“Who wants to sign a two or three contract with Frontier, raise your hands,” Irv asks.  “They have just destroyed their FiOS TV service in Indiana — my fingers couldn’t dial the cable company fast enough as I take my business somewhere else.”

Another Fort Wayne resident — Nick Behm, has been following Stop the Cap! ever since Verizon announced it was selling Ft. Wayne’s phone lines to Frontier.

“You guys had this company nailed — Indiana’s regulators should hire you folks and some other actual consumers to review these deals before they get rubber-stamped, because Frontier is going to put themselves out of business and risk landline service throughout our area,” Behm writes.  “How can you ruin a fiber service that sells itself?  Let Frontier run it.”

Neither Behm or Irv will be taking up Frontier’s offer, although Behm still has a term contract of his own — with Verizon.

“I am protected from Frontier’s cash grab for several more months, so at least I have time to prepare for the forthcoming cancellation — bye, bye Frontier.”

[flv width=”432″ height=”260″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/INC Now Ft Wayne New Charges for Frontier Customers 1-18-11.mp4[/flv]

INC Now delivers the bad (and according to Frontier – good) news to Fort Wayne, Ind., FiOS TV customers — your rates are going up as much as $30 a month.  (1 minute)