Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: "Michael C. Berch" <mcb@presto.ig.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Alert: AT&T May Consider Removing TDD Long Distance Discount
Message-ID: <8241@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 25 May 90 01:03:48 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: IntelliGenetics, Inc., Mountain View, Calif. USA
Lines: 39
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 383, Message 7 of 9


In the referenced article, CER2520@ritvax.bitnet (Curtis E. Reid) writes:

> I heard a disturbing news that AT&T may consider removing the TDD Long
> Distance Toll Call discounts when AT&T does its own billing.  The
> rationale for this is that no other services like MCI or Sprint offer
> this discount so why should AT&T.

> AT&T has a strong loyal base of handicapped and disabled customers.
> If something like this discount goes away, I'm sure that other
> services for handicapped customers will also go away, too.

> Can any TELECOM readers comment on this?  AT&T, don't consider 
> removing TDD discounts!!

Please don't take this the wrong way, but what is the justification
for discounts for TDD customers?  I can see doing it if the bandwidth
of TDD devices is so much smaller than voice that deaf people are
effectively paying more for less effective use of the same circuit for
the same amount of time as hearing people, but I have not heard that
argument brought up.  (And in which case I think there is a good
argument for the discount, or at least a special TDD rate structure.)

I don't object to AT&T's providing special services to TDD users that
cost AT&T extra but are required in order to make TDD service work
(e.g., TDD operator/trouble reporting services) but I don't see the
reason for giving a certain class of people a discount simply because
of a disability (or because of their race, religion, ethnic origin,
etc.).  Discounts for the economically disadvantaged are another case
entirely, and while I do not think that general ratepayers (or telco
shareholders) should have to subsidize "lifeline" service, telcos
offer such services because they are required to by state regulators.
I assume there is no such requirement for AT&T, MCI, Sprint, or others
providing LD service but not dial tone.


Michael C. Berch  
mcb@presto.ig.com / uunet!presto.ig.com!mcb / ames!bionet!mcb