Subject: Re: Action Alert for Comments in FCC Advanced Services Inquiry
Daniel del Solar (dsolar@well.com)
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1998 16:15:49 -0700
Message-Id: <35EC8024.5AE47104@well.com> Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1998 16:15:49 -0700 From: Daniel del Solar <dsolar@well.com> To: roundtable@cni.org Subject: Re: Action Alert for Comments in FCC Advanced Services Inquiry References: <3.0.3.32.19980901155218.008e1290@postoffice.att.net>
On 9/1/98, John Scwartz <schwartz@usa.net> wrote:
>
> On 9/1/98, Maureen Lewis <mlewis@apt.org> wrote:
> >
> > APT filed a petition on February 18, 1998, urging the FCC to undertake
> > simultaneous inquiry and rulemaking proceedings. The petition, suggests
> > specific measures for removing barriers to advanced network investment
> > and for affirmatively stimulating such investment. APT believes that
> > its proactive recommendations are a necessary corollary to easing
> > certain regulatory restrictions that discourage ILECs and new entrants
> > from building new sophisticated network facilities.
>
> Am I mistaken, or is this the very issue about which APT repeatedly has
> failed to respond on this very list? If so, why would APT expect that
> list members would be galvanized to action by this posting?
Perhaps because the FCC is interested in the appearance of community
input when it means to listen only to the people with money, as is the
case with the low power FM matter. But really, John, I do not know of
any reason. At least they, the FCC, has failed to reply in substance to
our (mostly your) queries in the matter. Perhaps the publicist can only
speak, and not hear.
But I would prefer to hear from the FCC on this. Will they now respond?
(Cynics would say that silence will rule at this and forward, as it has
in the recent past.)
Daniel
Daniel del Solar
<dsolar@well.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a16 : Tue Mar 23 1999 - 03:33:40 EST