patrick.net

Neither a Bush Phone or Obama Phone, but it is a Bill Clinton Phone

Bill Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Universal Service Fund

Universal service support made explicit. Prior to enactment of the Act, universal service had been funded through implicit subsidies, levied as above-cost business rates, urban rates, and above-cost rates for the “access charges” that long distance carriers paid as intercarrier compensation to local telephone companies for originating and terminating their subscribers’ long distance calls. Recognizing that new entrants would target those services that had above-cost rates, and thus erode universal service support, Congress included in the 1996 Act a provision requiring universal service support to be explicit, rather than hidden in above-cost rates. This requirement has only been partially implemented, however, and therefore significant implicit universal services subsidies still remain in above-cost rates for certain services.

Universal service is an economic, legal and business term used mostly in regulated industries, referring to the practice of providing a baseline level of services to every resident of a country. An example of this concept is found in the US Telecommunications Act of 1996, whose goals are:
to promote the availability of quality services at just, reasonable, and affordable rates
to increase access to advanced telecommunications services throughout the Nation
to advance the availability of such services to all consumers, including those in low income, rural, insular, and high cost areas at rates that are reasonably comparable to those charged in urban areas

Call it Crazy says

costs have skyrocketed since 2009

Because of the recession that started at that time. Derr. We should be concerned about so many other things right now.

Politicofact says

The first time you knew about any of this was September 27, 2012 from this article

Ummm, I know exactly when I first heard of this. It was from watching TV ads for it.

Who was advertising?

Also it's a BUSH Phone.

You knew that, right?

How come when Republicans on this board have a spat with the Patlibs they go it alone, YET, when one Patlib have a gripe with "the enemy" all of the Patlibs chime in. With the same "Talking points".

At least the republicans on this board ALL have different philosophies and areas of concern about the Government and issues they would like to see addressed. They all don't chime in zeroing in the same talking points. No matter how many of you Patlibots point fingers and accuse them of listening to AM talk radio.

It's quite humorous actually.

Captain'Troll & Call it Crazy do you ever stop whining?

You claim one thing or another and never attribute anything to yourselves.

Look in the mirror if you want answers to your stupid points.

CaptainShuddup says

How come when Republicans on this board have a spat with the Patlibs they go it alone, YET, when one Patlib have a gripe with "the enemy" all of the Patlibs chime in. With the same "Talking points".

At least the republicans on this board ALL have different philosophies and areas of concern about the Government and issues they would like to see addressed. They all don't chime in zeroing in the same talking points. No matter how many of you Patlibots point fingers and accuse them of listening to AM talk radio.

It's quite humorous actually.

Call it Crazy says

Maybe because they all have the same chip implantment so they only know the programmed response from Mother Jones or MSNBC???

You guys need to get a clue.

If anything all the points you continue attribute to others (Liberals as you put it) are clearly a reflection of yourselves.

Self portrait of Captin'Troll

From a perspective the only problem is one's "principles". It used to be, that if one was poor, had medical/mental problems, or some other calamity in their life, others would provide "charity" for those in need. Accepting charity was viewed as a less than amiable way to get along and people who could provide for them selves thought better of themselves for doing so. As the nations "principles" change from "accepting charity" to "demanding my rights" more people see the advantages of accepting the government handouts they will do so, after all, it's free money.

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always followed by dictatorship.”
Alexander Fraser Tyler, “The Decline and Fall of the Athenian Republic”

Politicofact says

Self portrait of Captin'Troll

Self? Silly HRHMedia I didn't build that, Obama did.

Captain'Troll, build it, you mean FILIBUSTER IT.

Your party couldn't hold a piss up in a brewery.

Silly Captain'Troll, Bush DESTROYED IT. Now grow a pair and admit it.

It so simple. Republicans , think about it.

The GOP say do as I say but do not do as I do.

Then when the dem's do the same, they cry wolf.

How many times can one party cry wolf?

These idiots would rather have seen the the US economy ending in Sept 2008.

Would you be better of today 4 years later with no intervention from the government.

Exactly, stop your moaning.

There was ZERO PRIVATE FUNDS AVAILABLE TO BORROW FROM.

It was a cheeky jab at far-right folks who complain about "welfare" but not "corporate welfare." Nothing more.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/QUFAcbUw-E8

Anyway, the FCC program that spawned George W Bush's "Obamaphone" program started in 1985 under socialist President Ronald Reagan and was only expanded in 2008 to include cell phones. Sorry you spent so much time coming up with all those hilarious features for nothing.

Printing a billion + for this program is no harder than printing for any other program.

Is it not odd when a countries currency is dependent on the velocity of the printing press's.

Seymour says

We both love capitalism. ...but because my opinion on the best candidate to preserve our capitalist society is different than yours, I'm 'dangerous'.

It isn't you. It is anyone who challenges their delusional fantasy island notion, their utter insane agenda they are so sadly trying to push down the throats of those who don't agree with them. Too many people are on to such pathetic manipulation and games. It scares them.

They cannot defend anything other than by using their didactic spin and disinformation or outright manipulation. It is both dry and old already.

Let it ride out. The USA will NEVER be Communist/Marxist and they cannot swallow that fact. Let them chatter on like fools they are just exposing themselves the more they repeat slam. It is their sad obvious technique that often includes when losing the argument just yell RACIST.

Politicofact says

Who was advertising?

I'd say that if you watch TV, you have seen ads for them by various companies. Safelink comes to mind,

Politicofact says

Also it's a BUSH Phone.

As previously discussed in this thread, it goes back to Bush or even farther back if you include land lines. I already said that this is one of those cases where perception beats reality.

http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/obama_phone_free_cell_phones.htm

Q: Was this program instituted by the Obama administration?
A: No. Nor was it just instituted "earlier this year," as the email claims. The program as it exists today was created over a decade ago by an act of Congress, the Telecommunications Act of 1996. A version of the Lifeline program was already in operation as far back as the early 1980s

CaptainShuddup says

It's quite humorous actually.

So you like the underdog.

I suppose based on your reasoning, the more popular a view is among intelligent people, the bigger problem you have with it ?

Humorous indeed.

Does it matter who started the free phones paid for by other peoples money. The horse is dead, let it go. The question, now is this," Do we want this program to continue and if not, who has the power to stop it. If we want the program to continue or expand, who has the power to make it happen.

When half of the money the government spends is either borrowed from the Fed, "printed" or borrowed from other countries where do we have the resources to pay for this?

This site of all sites knows the havoc of economic and human suffering caused by the housing bubble. What havoc will happen when everyone realizes our money has little value and it appears, no one in power (in the position to make a change) wishes to do anything other than give more than the next guy to get elected?

To get out of a hole the first thing you do is stop digging.

From the article:
"The program is called Lifeline, established in 1984, originally created to subsidize landline phone service for low income Americans, funded by government-collected telecommunication fees, paid by consumers.
In 2008, the program was expanded to support cell phones which quickly escalated the cost of the program. In 2008 the program cost $772 million, but by 2011 it cost $1.6 billion."
-----------------
Since you choose to incorrectly attribute this program to our current administration, might I point out that this program is funded by telecommunication fees that have been collected since 1984? That it was expanded in 2008 to include cell phones? How about mentioning that the growth of cell phone usage has far surpassed that of landlines - so it only follows that more $ would be collected and more would be paid out?
This program wasn't started by our current president, nor was it expanded under our current president. But, when looking for anything to blame on our president, it's a lot easier to make shit up than it is to find something that is actually his fault.

The message from the conservatives on this board is consistently the same thing - they don't like President Obama. It's quite humorous, actually.

Who can stop it?

You gonna concede this point?

I'm not sure what the "outrage" of the original article is exactly.

Take this:

"In 2008 the program cost $772 million, but by 2011 it cost $1.6 billion."

Food stamps have also expanded quite a bit. So are we supposed to chop food stamps back to pre-crash levels and watch the soup lines form and take bets on who'll win when homeless fight over dumpster scraps?

Should we take the "Bush" Medicaid Part D and chop it in half because it's "exploding" too? This "ObamaPhone" nonsense is another transparent attempt to pin everything on Obama. Who funds programs like this? Congress. Dealing with real problem like adults is too hard it seems.

Do food stamps cost $100 Billion a year?

http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/willis-report/blog/2012/07/30/corporate-welfare-costing-taxpayers-100b-year

NO

But it's ok for Corporates to receive $100Billion & no one says a word!

Let's start with the cream and work our way down.

You don't remove the safety net, which is what the Ryan Plan would do.

Tecumcari says

Because the Patlibs are a mindless collective that takes its orders from the Borg Duck.

Are the PatCons a mindless collective that takes its orders from Rush?

Hahahahah!

CL got the facts on this one, in another thread. The real story on the "ObamaPhone"? It's not coming out of Federal tax coffers and it's a "BushPhone" or maybe "WilsonPhone"!

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/09/27/924011/the-truth-about-the-obama-phone/?mobile=nc

I'm expecting zzyzzx and the other duped parties on this thread, to issue mea culpas and apologies any minute....

freak80 says

Define socialism for me.

Bailouts.

Technically, that is lemon socialism.