The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates • Hacker News Board

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#131

Post by nickalewis » Thu, Oct 22, 2015, 10:05 PM UTC

We need to eliminate or limit kickbacks next.

This is a monumental decision for inmates & their families, but long-term progress can be made by getting rid of commissions, particularly at the state & local level. The FCC chose not to make a decision on commissions (citing the lack of legal authority) however it's eliminating or limiting these kickbacks thats needed to really re-align the market. Currently commissions are negotiated on a percentage basis, so facilities have an incentive to favor high customer costs since they get a chunk. This could be improved by legislation limiting commissions to a per-minute basis, so facilities have incentive to favor lower cost & higher-volume. That way rates continue to move downward.

Think about it like this... With the FCC's decision today rates are limited to a max of 0.14 cent a minute. Since commissions are percentage based a facility could demand 13.99999 cent commissions. Theres no incentive for them not to! If states were to set a maximum per-minute commissions at say, .05 cent a minute, it would encourage facilities to push the rates down in order to increase usage. Rates would never fall below .05 cent, but facilities would have incentive to push the rates down as close to the maximum as they could. It would also help cut down on the extra fees vendor's charge. Since extra fees eat into the money that families can spend on actual calls, facilities would have financial incentive to favor lower fees that would increase the number of minutes used.

We've seen nationwide[1] that lowering the total price to families increases call volume. Also increasing phone calls fights recidivism and heals family units. It's something I've been reading and personally care alot about with my work with Penmate[2]. Today's victory was landmark, but there's certainly more progress ahead.

[1] 2014 FCC Report on ICS (search 'call volumes') http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60000975214 [2] http://penmateapp.com

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#132

Post by jessaustin » Thu, Oct 22, 2015, 10:14 PM UTC

smt88 wrote: post #80

unethical_ban wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's frustrating how much Congress has ceded to these agencies. it's a loophole in democracy.

To me, it's a mixed bag. For example, the EPA is working (though not enough) to prevent the end of human life on earth. That's something I wouldn't trust Congress to do, since they seem to be gridlocked forever on all common sense issues. But then there are agencies like the USDA, which fed "pink slime" to children for years in order to help out the cattle industry[1]. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_slime

There's nothing wrong with pink slime. If you want to eat cheap nutritious beef, it's a good thing. If you're a meat-packer trying to be less wasteful, it's a good thing. If you think the best pretext on which to wage class war is the content of various school lunches, apparently it's golden.

Pink slime is only a marginally-bad thing for cattle ranchers like me. I would benefit if people decided to only eat ribeye, because ribeye is a small portion of the total carcass and that would drive up the price of cattle. Conversely, every beef patty sold that includes 10% pink slime lowers the price of cattle just a little bit.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#133

Post by Spivak » Thu, Oct 22, 2015, 10:16 PM UTC

raymondh wrote: post #14

jMyles wrote: post #4

I know this is controversial, but the humane thing to do is to allow inmates unfettered access to the internet. Contrary to the orthodoxy on the matter, I assert that this will reduce the strength and relevance of 'prison gangs.'

More "naïve" than "controversial". Unfettered access ==> ability to run criminal business, organize groups, stalk victims, perpetrate fraud, etc.

Is there necessarily a problem with that? Their internet usage would be presumably heavily monitored and if they actually do those things then prosecute them for it and take their access away for some period of time.

Restricting internet access like you're proposing is presuming their guilt and ruining it for the rest of the inmates.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#134

Post by hugh4 » Thu, Oct 22, 2015, 10:17 PM UTC

scottshepard wrote: post #126

nickff wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read the commission's charter broadly enough, and without regard to either the original understanding or the original intent, you come to all kinds of absurd conclusions. From the text you provided, one could, for instance conclude that the FCC has the authority to issue regulations which require parents to provide all children above the age of two with a cellphone capable of high-speed internet access with no…

Except that prisoners are a captive audience, being held by the Government, and the phone companies get a monopoly on an essential good. So a federal regulatory body absolutely makes sense.

But is the FCC the correct body?

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#135

Post by s73v3r » Thu, Oct 22, 2015, 10:21 PM UTC

nickff wrote: post #53

linksbro wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They voted against it because they believe it "exceed(s) the commission’s legal authority."[1] But they both said the idea had "well intentions." [2] Makes you wonder what horrors a conservative majority FCC will cause. [1] http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/22/regulators-sl... [2] Full commission meeting (item was first on agenda) https://www.fcc.gov/events/open-commission-meeting-october-2...

I agree with the conservative FCC comissioners; this is a matter which should be dealt with in contracts between the government (state or federal) and the prison operator. The FCC has recently been venturing into fields where it does not have expertise or (clear) authority. When the FCC issues regulations which should have been addressed by another regulator or actor, accountability is lost. Who is now to blame when…

I don't. I don't care about private contracts. This behavior is wrong and should be stopped.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#136

Post by s73v3r » Thu, Oct 22, 2015, 10:22 PM UTC

nickff wrote: post #95

linksbro wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how I understand how an independent commission created by congress to "make available so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, rapid, efficient, Nationwide, and world-wide wire and radio communication services with adequate facilities at reasonable charges"[1] is increasing the scope of their authori…

If you read the commission's charter broadly enough, and without regard to either the original understanding or the original intent, you come to all kinds of absurd conclusions. From the text you provided, one could, for instance conclude that the FCC has the authority to issue regulations which require parents to provide all children above the age of two with a cellphone capable of high-speed internet access with no…

If the intent was different, then why didn't they explicitly mention that?

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#137

Post by hugh4 » Thu, Oct 22, 2015, 10:22 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #78

Someone1234 wrote: post #6

I don't understand why the Republicans voted against. Look, I get it, you support private industry. But let's remember context, you support capitalism where COMPETITION exists, in this situation it is an artificially created monopoly of one company. Now if they had an alternative proposal that required prisons to have two or more vendors, I'd be totally onboard with not setting an artificial price restriction. Since…

They will likely claim "principles" but sometimes you need to do what is pragmatic and right and forget principles from time to time.

"Forget principles, do what is (in your opinion) right" is exactly the kind of good intention with which the road to hell is paved.

Especially when the principle you're forgetting is the one that limits your own power. That's a very tempting sort of principle to forget.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#138

Post by ars » Thu, Oct 22, 2015, 10:23 PM UTC

smt88 wrote: post #130

ars wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What would be the harm in doing it and then seeing if the courts struck it down? That's a pretty terrible way to run a government. When you elect someone you expect them to follow the law and do their job. Not just do anything they want and say "it's fine, if we are wrong the court will fix it".

> That's a pretty terrible way to run a government. When you elect someone you expect them to follow the law and do their job. Whether or not it's terrible, it's the system of checks and balances that was envisioned by the founders of the United States. It's exactly how our government has (and does) run for its entire history. The courts exist for this purpose. "Follow the law" is not cut-and-dried. Statutes can be i…

And? You advocate for every government official to power grab as much as they can and let the courts sort it out?

The courts are there in case of mistakes, they are not intended as the primary way for government to function.

Do you realize just what you are advocating for? Every little police chief will claim any road he can, until a court tells him to stop. Every property inspector will levy fines for parking tickets until told he can't. Nothing stops me from setting up a toll booth at the end of the road, until the court tells me to stop.

No, this is not the way. People should, on their OWN, know what they should and should not do.

The Republicans felt this was a power grab by the FCC, you would have been happy if in fact they had grabbed that power, but that's because you like the issue at hand. Next time it will be for something you don't like.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#139

Post by s73v3r » Thu, Oct 22, 2015, 10:27 PM UTC

TimMeade wrote: post #10

Not to be the naysayer on this but it is a very serious incursion on states rights. The legal consensus i'm hearing is that it will be overturned by the judicial system. Does the FCC have the right to tell a state or town what to do with local calls? That is the root of this. It's a given that they can regulate interstate, but historically intrastate has been the rights of the states.

States rights once again got it wrong. I am not upset at all that the federal government stepped in and fixed it. I am upset that the states themselves allowed this to happen.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#140

Post by mc32 » Thu, Oct 22, 2015, 10:27 PM UTC

hugh4 wrote: post #137

mc32 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will likely claim "principles" but sometimes you need to do what is pragmatic and right and forget principles from time to time.

"Forget principles, do what is (in your opinion) right" is exactly the kind of good intention with which the road to hell is paved. Especially when the principle you're forgetting is the one that limits your own power. That's a very tempting sort of principle to forget.

This why I said some times, when things are obviously wrong, under the light of other, I consider, more relative or germane principles.