Research ArticleOpen AccessGoogle Scholar indexed
A Critical Evaluation of Telecommunication Act 1996
School of Economics and ManagementBeijing University of Posts and Telecommunications
School of Economics and ManagementBeijing University of Posts and Telecommunications
School of Economics and ManagementBeijing University of Posts and Telecommunications
- 1 School of Economics and ManagementBeijing University of Posts and Telecommunications
- 2 School of Economics and ManagementBeijing University of Posts and Telecommunications
- 3 School of Economics and ManagementBeijing University of Posts and Telecommunications
Journal of Service Science and Management·Volume 01 (2008)·Pages 83–90·Published 1 May 2008·DOI10.4236/jssm.2008.11008
Copy link · social · email
Abstract
Telecommunication Act 1996 was considered as a milestone in the history of US telecommunication sector, as it aimed at breaking monopoly in local telecommunication market and creating competition. During last 10 years, the pace of competition in local telephony market has been very slow. Baby Bells still hold a strong dominance and a near monop-oly position. They have even spread their monopoly to long distance market by mergers and acquisitions. This shows the failure of the Act. Local monopoly breaking policy, vertical reintegration, universal service and UNE pricing are the major reasons of this failure. Local loop is a natural monopoly and further investment by multiple companies is not efficient. Idea of universal service should be dropped.
Keywordstelecom act 1996Vertical IntegrationUniversal Service.
- Samuelson A. Paul, Nordhaus D. William (1995). “Economics.” McGRAW HILL Inc., pp. 154.
- Pindyck S. Robert , Rubinfeld L. Daniel (1998). “Mi-croeconomics.” Prentice Hall International Inc., pp. 353.
- Varian R. Hal (1992). “Intermediate Microeconomics – A modern Approach.” W.W. Norton & Company, pp. 430.
- Woroch A. Glenn (2002). “Local Network Competition.” Handbook of Telecommunication Economics, Els-vier,2002.
- Bomsel Olivier & Blanc G.L. (1999). “System growth in the US telecom industry: Analysis of the technical, in-dustrial and regulatory process in the US telecom indus-try.”Advanced Workshop in Regulation and Competition, Newport, USA, May 26-28, 1999.
- http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OSEC/library/legislative_histories/47.pdf
- http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OSEC/library/legislative_histories/40.pdf
- Goldstein, Fred R. (2005). “The great telecom meltdown.” Artech House, Inc., pp. 20.
- AT&T. “Milestones in AT&T History.” Available at http://www.corp.att.com/history/milestones.html
- AT&T. “Brief History: The Bell System.” Available at http://www.corp.att.com/history/history3.html
- Nicholas Economides (1997). “The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and its Impact.” The Annual Telecom-munications Policy Conference, Tokyo, Japan, December 4, 1997.
- AT&T. “A Brief History: Post Divestiture.”Available at http://www.corp.att.com/history/history4.html
- Teece D. (1995). “Telecommunication in Transition: Unbundling, reintegration and competition.” Center for research in Management, University of California, Berkeley.
- John R. Richard (2006). “Postal Networks and American Telecommunications.” XIV History Congress, Helsinki Finland, 2006 Session 107.
- Congress (1996). “Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. LA. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996).” Available at http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/tcom1996.pdf
- FCC, Industry Analysis and Technology Division, Wireline Competition Bureau (2007). “Local Telephone-Competition: Status as of December 31, 2005.” available at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279231A1.pdf
- FCC, Industry Analysis and Technology Division, Wireline Competition Bureau (2007). Trends in Tele-phone Service. Available at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-270407A1.pdf