STATE STUCK WITH NETWORK TO NOWHERE TELECOMMUNICATIONS CUSTOMERS PAID FOR FERRARI, BUT GOT SKATEBOARD.

Byline: Bruce Kushnick

As you plod through the Internet at speeds of 56K or worse - 75 percent of online users at home know this all too well - you might be unpleased to know that you have already paid for a revolutionary, fiber-optic, digital future that you never received.

Imagine cruising the web at speeds 100 times faster than the current Asymmetric Digital Subscriber line (ADSL), the Bell companies' current supposed advanced network. Instead, Internet customers in California have paid for a highway to nowhere, funded by bigger telephone bills giving profit margins to the Bell companies making them some of the richest businesses in America.

In the early 1980s Pac Bell and SBC promised to revolutionize yourcommunications. Southwestern Bell stated in its 1986 Annual Report:

``At the forefront of new technology is ISDN. Scheduled for commercial availability in 1988, ISDN will revolutionize day-to-day communications by allowing simultaneous transmission of voice, data and images over a single telephone line.``

Pacific Telesis's 1988 Annual Report states that ISDN will help California compete in the 21st Century's global economy:

``By testing and implementing advanced technologies like ISDN - which will allow customers to transmit digitized voice, text, video and graphics simultaneously over ordinary Pacific Bell lines - we're preparing Californiato compete in the 21st Century global economy.''

Instead, by the 1990s Pac Bell and the other Bells decided that they would create yet another revolution, the ``Information Superhighway.'' Pac Bell promised to spend some $16 billion dollars to rewire the state withfiber-optics. They said they would deliver this wonderland of technology, 500 channels of fantastic high speed interactive programming, or web speeds virtually 100 times faster than today's high-speed services to your home or office.

In November 1993, Pacific Bell announced a capital investment plan totaling $16 billion over the next seven years to make high-tech upgrades and to begin building California's ``Communications superhighway.'' Pac Bell touted the plan as a super information and entertainment network providing advanced voice, data and video services. Pac Bell promised that more then 1.5 million homes would be connected by the 1996, and 5 million homes by the end of the decade.

It just didn't happen.

Yet, you paid for it.

``Pacific Bell officials say most of the new network would be paid for by ratepayers because the upgrade would benefit phone customers by improving quality and reducing maintenance costs. (San Diego Union Tribune, Feb. 11, 1994)

Many people questioned the plan and complained that the Bells were creating a schism between the communities that would and would not be wired - the first signs of today's Digital Divide. The system couldn't be built and Bell Atlantic and US West (two other Bell companies) both opted out of portions of their info highway plans months before, citing technical difficulties.

Pac Bell made additional promises to wire California's schools andlibraries.

``Pacific Bell will spend $100 million during the next three years to hook up more than 7,400 schools, community colleges and libraries to computer and video networks, the company announced yesterday.

``By the year 2000, phone company officials predicted, every classroom will be wired to handle voice, data and video telecommunications.'' (San Diego Union Tribune, Feb. 15, 1994)

Pacific Bell President Phil Quigley said at the time that telephone rates would not be affected by the company's program because the money would come from the corporation's regular capital-spending budget. In the same breath,Pac Bell stated that it would, ``ask the Public Utilities Commission to setspecial rates for educational access.''

The Public Utilities Commission slapped you with the bill.

``The PUC is developing a $150 million-per-year grant program for schools, libraries and nonprofit groups to develop telecommunications programs, train personnel and buy equipment.``

Then, Southwestern Bell simply pulled the plug. In its 1999 Annual Reportthe company stated:

``. . . SBC also announced in 1997 that it was scaling back its limited direct investment in video services in the areas also served by Pacific Bell Telephone Company (PacBell) and Southwestern Bell Telephone Company(SWBell). As a result of this curtailment, SBC halted construction on the Advanced Communications Network (ACN) in California.

``Additionally, SBC curtailed certain other video-related activities including discontinuing its broadband network video trials in Richardson,Texas, and San Jose, California . . .''

In short, you paid for a Ferrari but you got a skateboard. The New Networks Institute estimates that with the write-offs, and the monies that were never spent, the public was charged over $2 billion dollars for a network to nowhere. New Networks Institute believes that Pac Bell's and SBC should be questioned to see if millions of dollars in customer refunds are due to the people of California.

You should ask your congressmen and senator, ``I've paid my money, where is my digital future?''