In other words they were fine when the money went to mainly rural people. Now that it might be going to urban people, they have a problem with it

It is probably time to reconsider the program, regardless of which evil political party is responsible for it.  Basic phone service is cheap and not as useful as it used to be.
Let's use that $2.2 billion/year to improve the Internet instead.

You mean the program that TRIPLED in size since 2009?

I'd be fine with the program being restricted back to landlines. I know I sound old, but I don't really see where cell phones are a necessity.

Sybarite: I'd be fine with the program being restricted back to landlines. I know I sound old, but I don't really see where cell phones are a necessity.

Would trimming it back to landlines have any cost-saving effect, other than just discouraging people from utilizing it though?  Cheap cell phones are cheaper than landlines, or at least very close in cost (I admit I haven't priced either lately).

The racial resentment associated with this program is nearly palpable.

CHANGE
CHANGE
CHANGE
CHANGE
OBAMAPHONE

Dusk-You-n-Me: The racial resentment associated with this program is nearly palpable.

It's all part of the right-wing narrative that says Obama won by buying the votes of the poors and/or blah people with programs like this. He definitely didn't win because most voters rejected the Republican Party's hard-right stances and policies.  It was the Obamaphones.

tenpoundsofcheese: You mean the program that TRIPLED in size since 2009?

Do you have a link for that?

James!: tenpoundsofcheese: You mean the program that TRIPLED in size since 2009?

Do you have a link for that?

Does TFA not count?

serial_crusher: James!: tenpoundsofcheese: You mean the program that TRIPLED in size since 2009?

Do you have a link for that?

Does TFA not count?

I mean beyond a claim made by a republican looking to cut the program. Because besides the TFA I'm not finding anything in the googles.

Before all the wharblegarble starts over Obama phones, I'd like to point out that the US government regulation of telephones has been one of the most effective programs historically that the US government has ever been involved in. Everyone biatched about Ma Bell before it was broken up in the 80's, but the reality of the situation is that that government regulation of the telecommunications system in the US was directly responsible for the incredibly high market penetration of land lines (something like 98% of all households at its peak).

Now, we can debate the continued effectiveness of such programs, and whether we need them or not. But historically speaking, this program is nothing new, and similar programs have been enormously successful in delivering the economic and social benefits of telephone services to Americans who could not otherwise afford them.

Personally, I'd like the government to get out of the buying cell phones business, and get back into regulation, particularly regulating te geography of the broadband infrastructure. I'd love to see broadband aggressively regulated like telephone in the early days, with a big push to expanding the capacity of the network, particularly in forcing companies to build out to unprofitable rural areas. Such a thing is unlikely to happen in the modern political climate, so I haz a sad....

serial_crusher: James!: tenpoundsofcheese: You mean the program that TRIPLED in size since 2009?

Do you have a link for that?

Does TFA not count?

Purse strings?

Sybarite: I'd be fine with the program being restricted back to landlines. I know I sound old, but I don't really see where cell phones are a necessity.

You're interviewing for a crappy but available job. You're on the bus home from the interview because you rely on public transit. The manager at McCrap, where you interviewed yesterday, calls you to tell you you're hired. Because you have to transfer to another bus which is late, you're not home to take the call. Manager hires the next person on the list instead.

I love it when Republicans find a video on YouTube and base their political strategy on it!

BunkoSquad: Sybarite: I'd be fine with the program being restricted back to landlines. I know I sound old, but I don't really see where cell phones are a necessity.

You're interviewing for a crappy but available job. You're on the bus home from the interview because you rely on public transit. The manager at McCrap, where you interviewed yesterday, calls you to tell you you're hired. Because you have to transfer to another bus which is late, you're not home to take the call. Manager hires the next person on the list instead.

That seems very unlikely.  McManager is going to leave a message.

I think that in the long run maintaining cell infrastructure and handing out cell phones is going to be cheaper than keeping the land lines alive while everyone else is moving away from them.  Also, for an emergency having a cell to call 911 is going to be a lot more helpful than trying to find one of the few remaining pay phones.

BunkoSquad: Sybarite: I'd be fine with the program being restricted back to landlines. I know I sound old, but I don't really see where cell phones are a necessity.

You're interviewing for a crappy but available job. You're on the bus home from the interview because you rely on public transit. The manager at McCrap, where you interviewed yesterday, calls you to tell you you're hired. Because you have to transfer to another bus which is late, you're not home to take the call. Manager hires the next person on the list instead.

See also: your housing situation is precarious, but you can't interview without a reliable contact number.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/carlos-slim-obamaphones_n_19 5 5929.html


The free phone program is essentially a government payoff to the world's richest man. Socialism indeed.

Cletus C.: CPennypacker: Get a job you stupid poor person

Good luck getting a job without a telephone you stupid poor person

Go weave your own bootstraps and then pull yourself up by them

Transportation
Appropriate clothing
Daycare

Good luck getting a job without those, stupid poor person.

Public transportation
http://www.dcgoodwill.org/index.php/workforce-development/clothing-v ou cher-program
Public schools

they had cell phones in the 1980's?

Any chance we can stop giving billions to the oil industry instead of buttfarking the poor and lower middle class?

SlothB77: they had cell phones in the 1980's?

Boy are you on a roll today or what? Did you miss the part of the article that talked about Bush expanding the program to include cell phones in 2008?

Sybarite: I'd be fine with the program being restricted back to landlines. I know I sound old, but I don't really see where cell phones are a necessity.

It doesn't sound like you're so much old as you haven't thought your plan all the way through.

The program isn't subsidizing a cell phone in addition to a landline.    The program helps provide phone service to households that lack it.

What possible reason would you have for restricting the program to landlines, when cell phones are so cheap and useful?

SlothB77: they had cell phones in the 1980's?

You are farking killing it today.

SlothB77: they had cell phones in the 1980's?

First, there were cell phones in the 1980s...but, the program didn't cover them.

Under the Bush administration, the FCC realized that cell phones were becoming more important than landlines, so the program was expanded to cover them.

Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: 2wolves: serial_crusher: James!: tenpoundsofcheese: You mean the program that TRIPLED in size since 2009?

Do you have a link for that?

Does TFA not count?

Purse strings?

Chief?

No, and I don't pretend to be one.

I pushing 60 and haven't had a landline in 6 years. On the rare occasion I need to fax something, I go to something like Kinkos. Luckily, most places with take an email with an attached scanned document.,

so, like acorn, republicans are going to kill a program because it helps black people. great.