Why States Must Stop Treating Your Smartphone Like A Dumb Rotary Phone

Woman Talking on Telephone (Photo by Library of Congress/Corbis/VCG via Getty Images)
Plain old telephone service (POTS) has been dying a slow death in the United States since the turn of the century. The number of POTS lines peaked at 192.5 million in 2000; by June 2024, only 7.6 million residential POTS lines remained. For much of the 20th century, almost every American household used only POTS to make a phone call. Now, only 1.3% of households rely on POTS to do so.
What happened? Consumers flocked to mobile and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) – advanced platforms that did not exist during the heyday of POTS's monopoly reign. The total number of mobile telephone lines in the U.S. surpassed POTS in 2004. Today, there are more than 388 million mobile lines in service. The number of VoIP lines passed POTS in 2013. There are now more than 64 million VoIP lines in service.
This is not news to the tens of millions of Americans who cut their telephone cord years ago and embraced mobile telephony or VoIP and all the advanced features they offer, like nationwide calling and the go-anywhere convenience of a cellphone. Unfortunately, for some state policymakers, the horse and buggy that is POTS continues to loom large, shaping their misinformed view of the advanced communications sector. Worryingly, some states have not only resisted removing outdated POTS laws from their books; they are actively seeking to extend those rules to new communications technologies, which have thrived in a competitive marketplace governed by a deregulatory framework. By doing so, states will undermine investment in new networks, increase prices, and ultimately harm consumers. None of this is good for America. Backwards-looking, heavy-handed regulation never has been.
Go Your Own Way…Or Maybe Not?
When it comes to applying old rules to new communications technologies, California has been in the vanguard. It has refused requests to roll back POTS-era rules; sought to regulate VoIP like POTS; and is finalizing rules that would hold competitive offerings like mobile and VoIP to a more punitive version of service quality standards originally devised for Ma Bell. At the same time, though, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), along with dozens of other states, have been actively engaged in regulatory modernization aimed at removing POTS rules to incentivize and accelerate the deployment of modern networks. California's approach is misguided and fails to put customers first.
States sometimes choose to forge their own path on certain issues. This seems to happen more often in California than elsewhere. Indeed, the state has a history of choosing an alternate path on issues like vehicle emissions and data privacy. In many of those instances, however, California framed its actions as necessary to either fill a perceived gap left by federal inaction, as it did when it passed a privacy law after years of failure by Congress to do so, or to go above and beyond existing federal rules, as it has done with vehicle emissions (California's federal waiver allowing it to impose stricter emissions standards is at risk of being revoked).
On issues of national importance, outlier approaches create collective action problems, which stifle progress towards achieving a shared federal goal. Assuring an orderly and timely transition away from POTS has been a national imperative since the early 2010s, when the Obama-era FCC began taking steps to relieve POTS providers of monopoly-era obligations so they could invest in modern networks and improve the services that consumers are actually using. Each subsequent FCC, under both Republican and Democratic leadership, has taken additional steps down this path. This reflects and furthers the country's bipartisan light-touch approach to regulating advanced communications platforms at a national level. Consistency and predictability are critical to maximizing investment, innovation, and overall consumer welfare gains.
California has lost its way. Its proposed service quality rules illustrate just how far outside the mainstream the state is on these issues and how continued pursuit of its unique – and highly regulatory – agenda for communications services could impede national transition efforts.
Welcome To The Hotel California
The notion of service quality rules might sound innocuous, but the rules proposed in California are incredibly exacting and could end up harming consumers rather than protecting them.
In a nutshell, California seeks to regulate voice service quality by applying standards governing how providers of all ilk – POTS, mobile, and VoIP – address almost every aspect of service, including how quickly they act in response to an installation request; reporting on and fixing outages; crediting customers for service disruptions; and how long it takes for a customer service rep to pick up the phone. In many cases, the proposed rules are stricter, and the penalties more punitive, than the rules devised just for POTS, the antiquated technology deployed and governed as a natural monopoly service.
Where's the beef? Numerous stakeholders of all sizes have faulted regulators for failing to provide compelling data demonstrating actual negative trends in service outages or degradation in service quality. For example, many have argued that the outage data cited by regulators in support of their rules generally fail to account for the underlying cause of the disruption. Oftentimes, a mobile or VoIP outage is attributable to a loss of electric power, a common occurrence in California that is beyond the control of communications service providers. For these reasons, the FCC has rightfully forged a different approach, one that supports investment in network reliability and encourages collaboration among communications providers and electric utilities to restore service.
At the same time, there appears to have been little effort by regulators in California to weigh the compliance costs for providers against the benefits the proposed service quality rules purport to deliver to customers. This is especially relevant in the context of POTS, the user base of which is rapidly shrinking. Per the latest FCC data, there are less than 600,000 residential POTS subscriptions in California (population: 39.4 million). POTS prices will inevitably rise as service providers pass through some portion of their higher compliance costs to a smaller number of customers. Meanwhile, the compliance costs for newly imposed standards on mobile and VoIP providers will also likely be passed through in part to customers, resulting in higher prices for them as well.
To the extent some of these costs cannot be recouped, there will be less capital available to service providers to invest in next-generation networks or to invest in the same customer service tools the rules claim to incent. This ultimately harms consumers and frustrates timely realization of an overarching goal to move on from POTS so that new platforms are not burdened, directly or indirectly, by monopoly-era rules.
What's Next
California is not alone in dragging its feet on the transition away from POTS. Numerous states still have POTS-era rules in effect. Some, following California's lead, are also exploring whether to regulate broadband, VoIP, and mobile like traditional telephone service.
Inevitably, these actions will trigger lawsuits, with service providers arguing that federal law limits state authority to regulate non-POTS services. Even in the context of POTS, arguments could be made that state efforts impeding fulfillment of national goals for the POTS transition might also be susceptible to preemption.
A sounder approach would be for state policymakers to listen to what consumers are telling them about their communications preferences and react accordingly. In the case of voice communications, consumers have been voting with their feet for years. Unlike 50 or 100 years ago when POTS ruled the world, there is no shortage of options for people to communicate with each other. And now with satellite 'direct to cell' technology rolling out alongside grant funds via the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, which will facilitate universal broadband availability, there are few parts of the country where some form of non-POTS communications platform is unavailable.
In this new environment, providers are aggressively competing on service quality, speed, latency, price, and a host of other service parameters. Regulation is not a bad word, but in the advanced communications arena, the type of regulation being considered by California and others is simply not necessary. If a customer feels let down by one voice or non-voice service, they can easily switch to another. And that is exactly what they are doing. Any action that impedes these dynamics should be flatly rejected because unnecessarily regulating a competitive marketplace will only harm consumers.
States might also take a page from the FCC and adopt a 'delete, delete, delete' mindset and begin to actively review and repeal antiquated regulations. Regulators can do their job if they deregulate. There is no requirement that they must regulate just for the sake of regulating.
Finally, the spate of recent regulatory actions in California only adds to the urgency for Congress to update federal communications law. This is long overdue and critical now that the Supreme Court has made clear that administrative agencies like the FCC can only act according to specific Congressional delegations of authority. An update that empowers the FCC to facilitate a smooth transition from POTS by allowing it to preempt burdensome and backward-looking regulatory actions like those in California is needed.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

43 minutes ago

How the US bombarded Iranian nuclear sites without detection

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates -- It was an unprecedented attack years in the making, with some last-minute misdirection meant to give the operation a powerful element of surprise. U.S. pilots dropped 30,000-pound bombs early Sunday on two key underground uranium enrichment plants in Iran, delivering what American military leaders believe is a knockout blow to a nuclear program that Israel views as an existential threat and has been pummeling for more than a week. American sailors bolstered the surprise mission by firing dozens of cruise missiles from a submarine toward at least one other site. Dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer, U.S. officials say the plan was characterized by a 'precision strike' that 'devastated the Iranian nuclear program,' even as they acknowledged an assessment was ongoing. For its part, Iran denied that any significant damage had been done, and the Islamic Republic pledged to retaliate. Taking off from the U.S. heartland, B-2 stealth bombers delivered a total of 420,000 pounds of explosives, aided by an armada of refueling tankers and fighter jets — some of which launched their own weapons. U.S. officials said Iran neither detected the inbound fusillade, nor mustered a shot at the stealthy American jets. The operation relied on a series of deceptive tactics and decoys to maintain the secrecy, U.S. officials said hours after the attack, which was preceded by nine days of Israeli attacks that debilitated Iran's military leadership and air defenses. Even before the planes took off, elements of misdirection were already in play. After setting parts of the plan in motion, Trump publicly announced Thursday that he'd make a decision within two weeks on whether to strike Iran — ostensibly to allow additional time for negotiations, but in actuality masking the impending attack. One group of B-2 stealth bombers traveled west from Missouri on Saturday as decoys, drawing the attention of amateur plane spotters, government officials and some media as they headed toward a U.S. air base in the Pacific. At the same time, seven other B-2s carrying two 'bunker buster' bombs apiece flew eastward, keeping communications to a minimum so as not to draw any attention. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at Sunday's briefing that it was all "part of a plan to maintain tactical surprise' and that only 'an extremely small number of planners and key leaders' knew about it in Washington and Florida, where U.S. Central Command is based. After 18 hours of furtive flying that required aerial refueling, the armed B-2 Spirit bombers, each with two crew members, arrived on time and without detection in the Eastern Mediterranean, from where they launched their attack runs. Before crossing into Iran, the B-2s were escorted by stealthy U.S. fighter jets and reconnaissance aircraft. A graphic released by the Pentagon showed the flight route as passing over Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. It was unclear whether those countries were notified of the U.S. overflight in advance. Most U.S. lawmakers were also kept in the dark, with some Republicans saying they were provided a brief heads-up by the White House before the strike. 'Our B-2s went in and out and back without the world knowing at all,' Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told reporters Sunday. About an hour before the B-2s entered Iran, Caine said that a U.S. submarine in the region launched more than two dozen Tomahawk cruise missiles against key targets, including a site in Isfahan where uranium is prepared for enrichment. As the U.S. bombers approached their targets, they watched out for Iranian fighter jets and surface-to-air missiles, but encountered none. At 6:40 p.m. in Washington and 2:10 a.m. in Tehran, the first B-2 bomber dropped its pair of GBU-57 massive ordnance penetrators on the deeply buried Fordo uranium enrichment plant. It was the first time these so-called 'bunker busters' had ever been used in combat. Each 30,000-pound bomb is designed to burrow into the ground before detonating a massive warhead. The Fordo site received the bulk of the bombardment, though a couple of the enormous bombs were also dropped on a uranium enrichment site at Natanz. The U.S. bombs fell for about half an hour, with cruise missiles fired from submarines being the last American weapons to hit their targets, which included a third nuclear site at Isfahan, Caine said. Both Iran and the U.N. nuclear watchdog said there were no immediate signs of radioactive contamination around the sites. The mission included: — 75 precision-guided weapons: these included 14 GBU-57 'bunker buster' bombs deployed by the seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers, and more than two-dozen Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from a U.S. submarine. — 125 aircraft, including the B-2 bombers, fighter jets and refueling planes. Hegseth said Sunday that 'our boys in those bombers are on their way home right now.' But a U.S. official said one woman was among those piloting the B-2 bombers. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the mission publicly. Caine said the use of the bunker-buster bombs made the mission historic, as did other elements. 'This was the largest B-2 operational strike in U.S. history, and the second longest B-2 mission ever flown, exceeded only by those in the days following 9/11," he told reporters Sunday. ___

44 minutes ago

Oil gains and US stock futures, Asian shares slip after US strikes Iran nuclear sites

BANGKOK -- Global markets appeared to take the U.S. strike against nuclear targets in Iran in stride as investors watched to see how Iran will react. The price of oil initially jumped more than 2% but fell back slightly on Monday. U.S. stock futures and most Asian shares declined. The big question is what Iran will do, analysts said, while the U.S. military's strike on three Iranian sites raised urgent questions about what remains of Tehran's nuclear program. "I believe what we are thinking is or the thinking is that it is going to be a short conflict. The one big hit by the Americans will be effective and then we'll get back to sort of business as usual, in which case there is no need for an immediate, panicky type of reaction,' said Neil Newman, managing director of Atris Advisory Japan. The price of Brent crude oil, the international standard, was up 1.2% at $77.94 a barrel. U.S. crude also jumped, gaining 1.3% to $74.82 a barrel. The attacks Saturday raised the stakes in the war between Israel and Iran, and the futures for the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones Industrial Average slipped 0.3%. The Nasdaq future contract fell 0.5%. Treasury yields were little changed. The conflict began with an Israeli attack against Iran on June 13 that sent oil prices yo-yoing and rattled other markets. Iran is a major producer of oil and also sits on the narrow Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the world's crude passes. Closing off the waterway would be technically difficult to pull off but it could severely disrupt transit through it, sending insurance rates spiking and making shippers nervous to move without U.S. Navy escorts 'The situation remains highly fluid, and much hinges on whether Tehran opts for a restrained reaction or a more aggressive course of action,' Kristian Kerr, head of macro strategy at LPL Financial in Charlotte, North Carolina, said in a commentary. Iran may be reluctant to close down the waterway because it uses the strait to transport its own crude, mostly to China, and oil is a major revenue source for the regime. Speaking to Fox News on Sunday, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said disrupting traffic through the strait would be 'economic suicide" and would elicit a U.S. response. "I would encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them about that because they heavily depend on the Strait of Hormuz for their oil,' Rubio said. Tom Kloza, chief market analyst at Turner Mason & Co said he expects Iranian leaders to refrain from drastic measures and oil futures to ease back after the initial fears blow over. Disrupting shipping would be " a scorched earth possibility, a Sherman-burning-Atlanta move,' Kloza said. Writing in a report, Ed Yardeni, a long-time analyst, agreed that Tehran leaders would likely hold back. 'They aren't crazy,' he wrote in a note to investors Sunday. 'The price of oil should fall and stock markets around the world should climb higher.' Other experts aren't so sure. Andy Lipow, a Houston analyst covering oil markets for 45 years, said countries are not always rational actors and that he wouldn't be surprised if Tehran lashed out for political or emotional reasons. 'If the Strait of Hormuz was completely shut down, oil prices would rise to $120 to $130 a barrel,' said Lipow, predicting that that would translate to about $4.50 a gallon at the pump and hurt consumers in other ways. 'It would mean higher prices for all those goods transported by truck, and it would be more difficult for the Fed to lower interest rates.' In Asian trading early Monday, Taiwan's Taiex fell 1.4% while the Kospi in South Korea initially lost 1% but then regained some lost ground to fall 0.2% to 3,016.71. Much of East Asia depends on oil imported through the Strait of Hormuz. In Tokyo, the Nikkei 225 edged 0.2% lower to 38,344.15, as losses for most shares were offset by gains for defense oriented stocks. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries climbed 0.8% and ShinMaywa Industries, another major weapons maker, surged 1.5%. 'The U.S. strike on Iran certainly is very good for defense equipment,' Newman of Atris Advisory said, noting that both Japan and South Korea have sizable military manufacturing hubs. Australia's S&P/ASX fell 0.4% to 8,475.70. Hong Kong's Hang Seng regained lost ground, climbing 0.4% to 23,622.71, while markets in mainland China advanced. The Shanghai Composite index picked up 0.5% to 3,376.65. In currency dealings, the U.S. dollar rose to 147.16 Japanese yen from 146.66 yen. The euro climbed to $1.1515 from $1.1473.

an hour ago

US boosts emergency Mideast evacuations and travel warnings after Trump orders strikes in Iran

WASHINGTON -- The State Department has doubled the number of emergency evacuation flights it is providing for American citizens wishing to leave Israel, ordered the departure of nonessential staff from the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon and is stepping up travel warnings around the Middle East because of concerns Iran will retaliate against U.S. interests in the region for the weekend strikes on its nuclear facilities. In an alert sent to all Americans worldwide and posted to its website on Sunday, the State Department warned all U.S. citizens abroad to exercise caution. 'The conflict between Israel and Iran has resulted in disruptions to travel and periodic closure of airspace across the Middle East,' it said. 'There is the potential for demonstrations against U.S. citizens and interests abroad. The Department of State advises U.S. citizens worldwide to exercise increased caution.' In a notice, also issued on Sunday, the department said it had ordered nonessential personnel and the families of staff at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut to leave Lebanon 'due to the volatile and unpredictable security situation in the region.' The notice made no mention of any potential evacuation flights or other assistance for private Americans wanting to leave Lebanon but said those who want to should try to use existing commercial services to depart. At the same time, the department issued warnings to U.S. citizens in Saudi Arabia and Turkey to take extra security precautions given the uncertainty. 'Given reports of regional hostilities, the U.S. Mission to Saudi Arabia has advised its personnel to exercise increased caution and limit non-essential travel to any military installations in the region,' the department said in its notice for Saudi Arabia. In Turkey, the department said U.S. personnel 'have been cautioned to maintain a low profile and instructed to avoid personal travel to the U.S. Consulate Adana consular district,' which includes the NATO airbase at Incirlik. 'Negative sentiment toward U.S. foreign policy may prompt actions against U.S. or Western interests in Turkey,' the statement said. Late Saturday, the department said it was stepping up evacuation flights for American citizens from Israel to Europe and continuing to draw down its staff at diplomatic missions in Iraq. But even before the U.S. airstrikes on Iran were made public by President Donald Trump on Saturday evening in Washington, the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem had announced the start of evacuation flights for private Americans from Israel. Sixty-seven American citizens left Israel on two government flights bound for Athens, Greece, on Saturday and four more evacuation flights to Athens had been planned for Sunday, according to an internal State Department document seen by The Associated Press. However, due to the closure of Israeli airspace after the U.S. airstrikes on Iran three of those four flights were canceled, according to an update from the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem. The embassy is planning to reschedule the canceled flights to Athens on Monday when it expects as many as six evacuation flights to the Greek capital, along with a chartered flight to Rome and another flight to Cyprus, according to the update. In addition to the flights that have already left, a cruise ship carrying more than 1,000 American citizens, including several hundred Jewish youngsters who had been visiting Israel on an organized tour, arrived in Cyprus, according to the document. It also said the evacuation of non-essential personnel at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and consulate in Erbil is continuing. Those staffers had been ordered to leave even before Israel began its military operation in Iran more than a week ago. 'As part of our ongoing effort to streamline operations, additional personnel departed Iraq on June 21 and 22,' the department said. 'These departures represent a continuation of the process started on June 12.' As of Saturday, more than 7,900 Americans had asked for assistance in leaving Israel and more than 1,000 had sought help in leaving Iran, where the U.S. has no diplomatic presence, the document said. There are roughly 700,000 Americans, many of them dual U.S.-Israeli citizens, in Israel and many thousands of Americans, most of them dual U.S.-Iranian citizens, in Iran. It was not clear how many Americans had successfully made it out of Iran through overland routes, although the document said more than 200 had entered neighboring Azerbaijan as of Saturday since the conflict began. After the U.S. strikes in Iran, security officers at all U.S. embassies and consulates have been instructed to conduct reviews of their post's security posture and report back to the State Department by late Sunday.