Date: 25 Nov 2012
Telecommunication in the US: From Regulation to Competition (Almost)
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Alfred E. Kahn was an observer and practitioner of telecommunications regulation as technology changed the industry from a natural monopoly to a platform-based oligopoly among telephone, cable, satellite, and wireless carriers. Regulation and legislation were slow to recognize these changes, and large welfare losses occurred, some of which could have been avoided if regulators, legislators and economists had followed Fred’s economic advice: Prices must be informed by costs; the relevant costs are actual incremental costs; costs and prices are an outcome of a Schumpeterian competitive process, not the starting point; excluding firms from markets is fundamentally anticompetitive; a reliance on imperfect markets subject to antitrust law is preferable to necessarily imperfect regulation; and a regulatory transition to deregulation entails propensities to micromanage the process to generate preferred outcomes, visible competitors, and expedient price reductions.
This paper is an expanded version of “Telecommunications Deregulation,” a paper that was presented at the 2012 American Economic Association session that was entitled “In Remembrance of Alfred E. Kahn: Fred Kahn’s Impact on Deregulation and Regulatory Reform.” Both Hausman and Taylor have consulted for numerous telecommunications companies.
Bajaj, V., & Maxon, T. (2005). Deal near for takeover of AT&T? Dallas Morning News, January 28. Web site: http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050128/news_1b28att.html.
Baumol W., Sidak J. G. (1994) Toward competition in local telephony. MIT Press, Cambridge
Blumberg, S., & Luke, J. (2012). Wireless substitution: Early release of estimates from the National Interview Health Survey, July–December 2011. Web site: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/wireless201206.pdf.
Breyer, S. (1999). AT&T Corp. v. Iowa Utilities Board, 119 S. Ct. 721. Web site: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/525/366#writing-type-12-Breye.
Cave M. (2006) Encouraging infrastructure competition via the ladder of investment. Telecommunications Policy 30(3–4): 223–237CrossRef
Clarke, R. (2006). Costs of neutral/unmanaged IP networks. Review of network economics, 8(1), Retrieved November 7, 2012, from http://ssrn.com/abstract=90343.
Crandall R. W., Waverman L. (1995) Talk is cheap. The Brookings Institution, Washington
Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service. (2011). Monitoring report, CC Docket Nos. 98-02, 96-45.
FCC. (1995). In the matter of price cap performance review for local exchange carriers, CC Docket No. 94-1, First report and order.
FCC. (2007). RBOC applications to provide in-region, InterLATA Services Under § 271. In the matters of section 272(f)(1) sunset of the boc separate affiliate and related requirements (and others), WC Docket Nos. 02-112 and 06-120, CC Docket No. 00-175, report and order and memorandum opinion and order. Web site: http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/in-region_applications.
FCC. (2009). Telecom industry revenues, 2009. Web site: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-306567A1.pdf.
FCC. (2010). In the matter of preserving the open internet, broadband industry practices, FCC GN Docket No. 09-191, WC Docket No. 07-52, Report and order, released December 23, 2010.
FCC. (2011a). In the Matter of Jurisdictional Separations and Referral to the Federal-State Joint Board: Report and Order, CC Docket No. 80-286.
FCC. (2011b). Local telephone competition: Status as of December 31, 2011. Web site: http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db0614/DOC-314631A1.pdf.
Griffin J. (1982) The welfare implications of externalities and price elasticities for telecommunications pricing. Review of Economics and Statistics 64(1): 59–66CrossRef
Hausman J., Tardiff T., Belinfante A. (1993) The effects of the breakup of AT&T on telephone penetration in the United States. American Economic Review 83(2): 178–184
Hausman, J. (1997). Valuing the effect of regulation on new services in telecommunications. Brookings papers on economic activity: Microeconomics (pp. 1–54). Web site: http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/bpea/editions/~/media/Projects/BPEA/1997%20micro/1997_bpeamicro_hausman.PDF.
Hausman J. (1998) Taxation by telecommunications regulation. Tax Policy and the Economy 12: 29–48
Hausman, J. (2000). Regulated costs and prices in telecommunications. In G. Madden & S. J. Savage (Eds.), The international handbook of telecommunications economics , Vol. II. (Chapter 12). Northampton, Massachusetts: Edward Elgar.
Hausman, J. (2002). Mobile telephone. In M. Cave et al. (Eds.), Handbook of telecommunications economics . North Holland. Chapter 13.
Hausman J., Leonard G., Sidak J. G. (2002) Does bell company entry into long-distance telecommunications benefit consumers?. Antitrust Law Journal 70: 463–484
Hausman, J., & Sidak, J. G. (2007). Telecommunications regulation: Current approaches with the end in sight. NBER. Web Site: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c1256.
Iowa Utils. Bd. v. FCC. (2000). 219 F.3d 744 (8th Cir. 2000). Web site: https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/219/219.F3d.744.96-3321.html.
Kahn A. (1971) The economics of regulation: Principles and institutions, Vol. 2. Wiley, New York
Kahn A. (1979) The Richard T. Ely lecture: Applications of economics to an imperfect world. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings 69(2): 1–13
Kahn, A. (1984). The uneasy marriage of regulation and competition. Telematics, 1, 1–2, 8–17.
Kahn A., Shew W. (1987) Current issues in telecommunications regulation: Pricing. Yale Journal on Regulation 4: 191–256
Kahn A. (1987) Deregulatory schizophrenia. California Law Review 75(3): 1059–1068CrossRef
Kahn A. (1988a) The economics of regulation, Vol. 1. MIT Press, Cambridge
Kahn A. (1988b) The economics of regulation, Vol. II. MIT Press, Cambridge
Kahn A. (1992) Market power issues in deregulated industries. Antitrust Law Journal 60(3): 857–866
Kahn, A. (1993). Testimony before the State of New York Public Service Commission in the petition of Rochester telephone corporation for approval of proposed restructuring plan (Panel on Public Policy Issues with Robert W. Crandall), Case Nos. 93-C-0033 and 93-C-0103.
Kahn, A. (1994a). Affidavit: In the matter of price cap performance review for local exchange carriers, notice of proposed rulemaking, FCC CC Docket No. 94-1.
Kahn A. (1994b). Panel direct and rebuttal testimony before the State of New York Public Service Commission in the petition of Rochester telephone corporation for approval of proposed restructuring plan on public policy issues in support of settlement.
Kahn A., Taylor W. (1994) The pricing of inputs sold to competitors: A comment. Yale Journal on Regulation 11(1): 225–240
Kahn, A. (1996). Ask not the bells for tolls. Wall Street Journal, August 6, p. A14.
Kahn, A. (1997). Statement in support of The Southern New England telephone company’s proposed reorganization.
Kahn A. (1998) Letting go: Deregulating the process of deregulation. MSU Public Utility Papers, East Lansing, MI
Kahn A., Tardiff T., Weisman D. (1999) The telecommunications act at three years: An economic evaluation of its implementation by the federal communications commission. Information Economics and Policy 11: 319–365CrossRef
Kahn A. (2001) Whom the gods would destroy, or how not to deregulate. AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Washington D.C.
Kahn, A., & Taylor, W. (2002). Declaration: In the matter of AT&T Corp. petition for rulemaking to reform regulation of incumbent local exchange carrier rates for interstate special access services, FCC RM No. 10593.
Kahn, A. (2003). Regulatory politics as usual. Washington D.C.: AEI-Brookings Joint Center. Web site: http://www.aei.org/article/regulatory-politics-as-usual.
Kahn A. (2004) Lessons from deregulation. AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Washington D.C.
Kahn, A. (2005). Economic Justification for Telus’ Two-Facility Bright-Line Forbearance Test. Appendix 3 to comments of Telus Communications Inc. in Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission, Docket PN-2005-2.
Kahn, A. (2006). a democratic voice of caution on network neutrality. The Progress & Freedom Foundation. Retrieved November 7, 2012 from http://www.pff.org/issues-pubs/ps/2006/ps2.24voiceofcautiononnetneutrality.htm.
Kahn, A. (2007). Network neutrality. Washington D.C.: AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Working Paper RP07-05. Web site: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=97351.
Keynes J. M. (1936) The general theory of employment, interest, and money. Harcourt, Brace & World, New York
Laffont J.-J., Tirole J. (1993) A theory of incentives in procurement and regulation. MIT Press, Cambridge
Laffont J.-J., Tirole J. (2000) Competition in telecommunications. MIT Press, Cambridge
Litan, R., & Singer, H. (2007). Slouching towards Mediocrity: unintended consequences of net neutrality regulation. Journal on Telecommunications and High Technology Law. Web site: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=94204.
Mueller M. (1997) Universal service: Competition, interconnection, and monopoly in the making of the American telephone system. MIT Press, Cambridge
Perl L. (1983) Residential demand for telephone service. National Economic Research Associates, Inc, White Plains, NY
Perl, L. (1985). Social welfare and distributional consequences of cost-based telephone pricing. (Paper presented at the 13th annual telecommunications policy research conference, Airlie House, Virginia).
Posner R. A. (1975) The social costs of monopoly and regulation. The Journal of Political Economy 83(4): 807–828CrossRef
Sichter, J. (1977). Separations procedures in the telephone industry: The historical origins of a public policy. Cambridge: Harvard University Program on Information Resources, Publication P-77-2.
Taylor L. (1994) Telecommunications demand in theory and practice. Kluwer Academic Publishers, BostonCrossRef
Temin P. (1987) The fall of the bell system. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRef
U.S. Department of Justice. (1980). US v. AT&T, CA No. 74-1698, U.S. Dist. Ct., Dist. of Columbia, Plaintiff’s third statement of contentions and proof. Quoted in Temin (1987, p. 357).
Weinhaus C., Oettinger A. (1988) Behind the telephone debates. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, New Jersey
- Telecommunication in the US: From Regulation to Competition (Almost)
Review of Industrial Organization
Volume 42, Issue 2 , pp 203-230
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. MIT Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 50 Memorial Drive, Building E52, Room 271D, Cambridge, MA, 02142-1347, USA
- 2. National Economic Research Associates, Inc., 200 Clarendon Street, 11th Floor, Boston, MA, 02116, USA