Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » That "special charge" on your cell phone bill.

That "special charge" on your cell phone bill.

+4
Captn Kaoz
Hospital Bob
Ghost Rider
gulfbeachbandit
8 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

gulfbeachbandit

gulfbeachbandit

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/09/17/More-Evidence-of-Rampant-Fraud-in-Lifeline-Free-Phone-Program?utm_source=contentsharing&utm_medium=linkexchange&utm_term=postion4&utm_content=More-Evidence-of-Rampant-Fraud-in-Lifeline-Free-Phone-Program&utm_campaign=foxnews

Guest


Guest

So I wanted to know what that special charge was.

---

That Universal Service Fee we pay as part of our phone bill each month has helped double the number of "free Obamaphones" in the hands of people in Ohio since last year to more than 1 million. While the mainstream media has ignored this story, the Ohio press is covering it. Maybe interest in the You Tube rant of the now infampus Obamaphone Lady, now at 2.2 million views in three days, will help get out the story of how this program skyrocketed in a key swing state. Then there is the issue of the dubious ethics of having private businesses both actively promote a government welfare program and name it after an elected figure in their marketing materials

From the Dayton Ohio Daily News.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/your_universal_service_fee_at_work.html#ixzz2fFRfLXE0
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook


This is taxation without representation.

So I looked up when this fee was initiated.

Universal Service Fund (USF) was created by the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in 1997 to meet Congressional universal service goals as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The 1996 Act states that all providers of telecommunications services should contribute to federal universal service in some equitable and nondiscriminatory manner; there should be specific, predictable, and sufficient Federal and State mechanisms to preserve and advance universal service; all schools, classrooms, health care providers, and libraries should, generally, have access to advanced telecommunications services; and finally, that the Federal-State Joint Board and the FCC should determine those other principles that, consistent with the 1996 Act, are necessary to protect the public interest

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund

Ghost Rider

Ghost Rider

Chrissy wrote:So I wanted to know what that special charge was.

---

That Universal Service Fee we pay as part of our phone bill each month has helped double the number of "free Obamaphones" in the hands of people in Ohio since last year to more than 1 million.  While the mainstream media has ignored this story, the Ohio press is covering it.  Maybe interest in the You Tube rant of the now infampus Obamaphone Lady, now at 2.2 million views in three days, will help get out the story of how this program skyrocketed in a key swing state.   Then there is the issue of  the dubious ethics of having private businesses both actively promote a government welfare program and name it after an elected figure in their marketing materials

From the Dayton Ohio Daily News.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/your_universal_service_fee_at_work.html#ixzz2fFRfLXE0
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook


This is taxation without representation.

So I looked up when this fee was initiated.

Universal Service Fund (USF) was created by the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in 1997 to meet Congressional universal service goals as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The 1996 Act states that all providers of telecommunications services should contribute to federal universal service in some equitable and nondiscriminatory manner; there should be specific, predictable, and sufficient Federal and State mechanisms to preserve and advance universal service; all schools, classrooms, health care providers, and libraries should, generally, have access to advanced telecommunications services; and finally, that the Federal-State Joint Board and the FCC should determine those other principles that, consistent with the 1996 Act, are necessary to protect the public interest

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund

Isn't it a misnomer to call it an "Obamaphone" in one paragraph when the next one states that the USF was created by the FCC in 1997 to meet the Telecommunications Act that Congress enacted in 1996?

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Ghost Rider wrote:
Isn't it a misnomer to call it an "Obamaphone" in one paragraph when the next one states that the USF was created by the FCC in 1997 to meet the Telecommunications Act that Congress enacted in 1996?
Very true.  And actually the roots of it go back to the Reagan administration...

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/10/obama-phone-roots-government-privatization/57415/

Captn Kaoz

Captn Kaoz

Bob wrote:
Ghost Rider wrote:
Isn't it a misnomer to call it an "Obamaphone" in one paragraph when the next one states that the USF was created by the FCC in 1997 to meet the Telecommunications Act that Congress enacted in 1996?
Very true.  And actually the roots of it go back to the Reagan administration...

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/10/obama-phone-roots-government-privatization/57415/
You are correct. It dates back to when we had 1 phone per household and it hung on the wall. This should still only cover land lines in homes and not mobile phones.

Sal

Sal

Captn Kaoz wrote:This should still only cover land lines in homes and not mobile phones.

Ummm ...

... why??

Watcher

Watcher

Sal wrote:
Captn Kaoz wrote:This should still only cover land lines in homes and not mobile phones.

Ummm ...

... why??
I was wondering the same thing.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Captn Kaoz wrote:You are correct.  It dates back to when we had 1 phone per household and it hung on the wall.  This should still only cover land lines in homes and not mobile phones.

What does the right to bear arms date back to?


_________________
I approve this message.

gulfbeachbandit

gulfbeachbandit

boards of FL wrote:
Captn Kaoz wrote:You are correct.  It dates back to when we had 1 phone per household and it hung on the wall.  This should still only cover land lines in homes and not mobile phones.
What does the right to bear arms date back to?
Does anyone have a 2nd amendment charge on their cell phone bill?
I know I don't.

boards of FL

boards of FL

gulfbeachbandit wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Captn Kaoz wrote:You are correct.  It dates back to when we had 1 phone per household and it hung on the wall.  This should still only cover land lines in homes and not mobile phones.
What does the right to bear arms date back to?
Does anyone have a 2nd amendment charge on their cell phone bill?  
I know I don't.
Maybe someone else can explain it to you.


_________________
I approve this message.

Markle

Markle

Sal wrote:
Captn Kaoz wrote:This should still only cover land lines in homes and not mobile phones.

Ummm ...

... why??
There are no qualifications. One journalist in the Washington area, who far exceeds the maximum requirements obtained THREE phones by filling out three applications. There was no check whatsoever on her income.

Many of the phones are immediately sold for cash by the recipients.

Washington, DC 9/15/2013
[...]
The Lifeline program was started 1985 and expanded in 2005 to include wireless service.

The cost of the program was roughly $2.2 billion in 2012, up from $800 million in 2009, according to the congressional Energy & Commerce Committee.

http://www.kjrh.com/dpp/news/local_news/investigations/Lifeline-phone-applications-TerraCom-YourTel-contract-agents-claim-signatures-forged

gulfbeachbandit

gulfbeachbandit

boards of FL wrote:
gulfbeachbandit wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Captn Kaoz wrote:You are correct.  It dates back to when we had 1 phone per household and it hung on the wall.  This should still only cover land lines in homes and not mobile phones.
What does the right to bear arms date back to?
Does anyone have a 2nd amendment charge on their cell phone bill?  
I know I don't.
Maybe someone else can explain it to you.
Nothing to explain. 2nd amendment is free.
obamaphones for low income lazy people cost everyone money.
"Special charge".

Captn Kaoz

Captn Kaoz

The right to keep and bear arms is in the constitution. The right to keep and bear a cell phone is not.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Captn Kaoz wrote:The right to keep and bear arms is in the constitution.  The right to keep and bear a cell phone is not.
But I thought the context in which something came to be should take precedence? Or is that the case only when it is convenient for you?


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

gulfbeachbandit wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
gulfbeachbandit wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Captn Kaoz wrote:You are correct.  It dates back to when we had 1 phone per household and it hung on the wall.  This should still only cover land lines in homes and not mobile phones.
What does the right to bear arms date back to?
Does anyone have a 2nd amendment charge on their cell phone bill?  
I know I don't.
Maybe someone else can explain it to you.
Nothing to explain.  2nd amendment is free.
obamaphones for low income lazy people cost everyone money.
"Special charge".
Nothing is free. Ask anyone who has ever died from a bullet fired by the legal owner of a registered firearm.


_________________
I approve this message.

Captn Kaoz

Captn Kaoz

boards of FL wrote:
Captn Kaoz wrote:The right to keep and bear arms is in the constitution.  The right to keep and bear a cell phone is not.
But I thought the context in which something came to be should take precedence?  Or is that the case only when it is convenient for you?
As usual, you missed my point.  The Lifeline started with good intentions (you know what's paved with good intentions?).  It was to help low income people to get help in case of an emergency.  This can still be done using a land line.  

This is another example of a government program that started with good intentions and has become a conduit for waste and corruption.

Ghost Rider

Ghost Rider

Captn Kaoz wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Captn Kaoz wrote:The right to keep and bear arms is in the constitution.  The right to keep and bear a cell phone is not.
But I thought the context in which something came to be should take precedence?  Or is that the case only when it is convenient for you?
As usual, you missed my point.  The Lifeline started with good intentions (you know what's paved with good intentions?).  It was to help low income people to get help in case of an emergency.  This can still be done using a land line.  

This is another example of a government program that started with good intentions and has become a conduit for waste and corruption.
You are absolutely right. You do not need for your home phone line to be active or an active cell phone to call 911. All that is required is an phone.

Sal

Sal

Markle wrote:
The Lifeline program was started 1985 and expanded in 2005 to include wireless service.
So in reality, the land-line phones should be called Reagan phones and the cell phones should be called Dubya phones.

Thanks for the clarification.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

I have to agree with Sal on this one. If according to markle "the program was extended in 2005 to include wireless phones", then why aren't they called Bushphones?

I know someone in Alexandria LA who is buying the phones off the people getting them free and then re-selling them for a profit. He says that practice is rampant.
So regardless if it's Reaganphones or Bushphones or Obamaphones, it's all just another boondoggle.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Although I will add this.  At least since the Reaganphones were landlines, they couldn't be obtained free and then re-sold.  I guess that applies only to the Bushphones and the Obamaphones.

Markle

Markle

Sal wrote:
Markle wrote:
The Lifeline program was started 1985 and expanded in 2005 to include wireless service.
So in reality, the land-line phones should be called Reagan phones and the cell phones should be called Dubya phones.

Thanks for the clarification.
Unlike Progressives, I am not afraid to post the TRUTH.

For instance, you missed this part...or was it intentional?

The cost of the program was roughly $2.2 billion in 2012, up from $800 million in 2009, according to the congressional Energy & Commerce Committee.

http://www.kjrh.com/dpp/news/local_news/investigations/Lifeline-phone-applications-TerraCom-YourTel-contract-agents-claim-signatures-forged

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » That "special charge" on your cell phone bill.

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum