Submitted via IRC for exec
FCC crackdown on cellphone subsidies leaves millions without service
The Ajit Pai-era FCC has spent much of its energy cracking down on claimed abuses of the Lifeline subsidy program, but this anti-fraud effort may be hurting low-income households more than it helps. The investigative news outlet Center for Public Integrity has used FCC data to determine that nationwide enrollment for cellphone subsidies has dropped by about 2.3 million people, or 21 percent, since 2017. The cuts have been particularly severe in places like the District of Columbia, where 49 percent of Lifeline users lost their subsidies between March 2018 and June 2019. Mississippi, Wyoming and Puerto Rico also lost a third or more of their enrollment in the same time frame.
Some of the problems may stem from a verifier system that was approved in 2016. It was meant to automatically check whether people qualified for Lifeline service and reduce fraud, but its incomplete access to benefit databases appears to have rejected people who were eligible for the program. Enrollment has plunged in those six states where the verifier launched, although a connection to the Medicaid database (and ideally state databases) might solve some of these problems.
However, the current FCC's crackdown (including ongoing support of the verifier) is raising concerns that it's simply interested in cutting off support for poor people, in sync with a presidency that has focused on cutting other benefits for low-income homes. There are particular concerns that changes due in December may prompt carriers to quit Lifeline and leave customers without access. Networks are supposed to help Lifeline recipients by providing more data and phasing out support for call minutes, but they're expected to complain when the subsidy amounts to less than $10 per month.
Based on a story from USA Today
(Score: 3, Insightful) by SomeGuy on Thursday November 07 2019, @12:37PM
Actually, that would be incredibly evil. That would exclude the increasing number of people who work (but are still looking for other jobs) in secure areas where cell phones are forbidden. It would also be a problem for people who drive a lot, where cell phone usage is ILLEGAL. Of course, it would exclude poor people who choose not to purchase an expensive smart phone just for that use, and check e-mail on library/friends/company computers. - which is sort of what the article is about, but subsides are NOT the answer. No problem if someone sends a text IN ADDITION to an e-mail or other communications methods, but locking people in to one proprietary method is very, very, wrong.