3 ms·

My understanding is rural access is often unprofitable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fu

• imglorp 9y ago
  Yet we've been paying into this fund decades, which was supposed to pay for rural access. Now, Relieving the telcos of this obligation despite them not completing universal access amounts to corporate welfare for those poor starving giants. Then there's E911. Of a bigger concern in rural areas will be losing access to 911. A lot of homes still keep landlines just for the 911 capabilities. Under the old rules the carriers had to demonstrate that customers would still have access to reliable 911, but it seems the carriers can now walk away without worrying about this. This is also a health and safety issue.
  • fencepost 9y ago
    The sparsely populated rural western states will lose the ability to call 911, but maybe it won't matter so much - with a big percentage of those small rural hospitals that depend on part on Medicaid money going under, anyone needing emergency medical treatment is probably going to be looking at a minimum time of 2-3 hours anyway so what's an extra hour or two? But you can count on one thing: "Thanks, Obama!"