Looks like our government has it's prorities all screwed up again.

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/568445

All compassionate governments should provide which of the following to their people:

a) food

b) shelter

c) medical care

d) a cellphone

Having a little problem with d)? Rephrase it then to "the right to communicate." Still a problem? It isn't south of the border.

In the wake of 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, the U.S. has increased the drive to ensure all citizens have basic phone services and access to help in times of emergency. More than 7 million Americans still don't.

Last fall, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) launched SafeLink, a program that provides eligible people with a free cellphone and 68 minutes a month of free airtime for the period of one year. It includes texting, voicemail, call waiting and caller ID.
The program is up and running in Florida, Tennessee and Virginia, where more than 2 million households qualify for the service, and is scheduled to go into nine other states, including New York, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.SafeLink was the brainchild of Miami-based TracFone Wireless Inc., the largest prepaid cellphone company in the U.S. As a purely prepaid provider, TracFone has always aimed at the market's lower end."A telephone service, just in general, is not a privilege, it's a right, and we feel it's a corporate responsibility to provide it," says José Fuentes, TracFone's director of government relations. "Everyone should be in contact, should have the opportunity to get a phone call, especially if it's an employer."

Yes. But a free cellphone?

Granted mobiles have become ubiquitous. As of 2008, more than 21 million Canadians were using them. Analysts say that those who can't afford them – or, more likely, their running costs – are increasingly excluded from today's hyper-connected world."A phone is an essential need," says Sherri Torjman, vice-president of the Caledon Institute of Social Policy, "but is it a right? The SafeLink program raises a significant question: How do you keep human rights up to date with technology?"

A 2007 U.S. study on the impact of cellphones on low-income people concluded they are an "imperative necessity" in a high-tech world. Some 40 per cent of blue-collar workers said the phone's mobility had improved their chances of finding a job and earning money through self-employment."Cellphone connectivity vastly encourages their opportunities and remains central to (their) everyday survival," said study author Nicholas Sullivan, then at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Those eligible for SafeLink must already be on a federal welfare program – Medicaid, public housing, food stamps and so on. But people making under a certain annual income can also qualify: The ceiling for a single person is $18,000; for a family of four, $26,000.The prepaid approach solves a basic obstacle faced in the past by low-income people, says TracFone's Fuentes. There's no way to get disconnected because there are no deposits, credit checks, hidden fees, incomprehensible packages or surprising monthly charges.

It's the latest offering from Lifeline, an FCC program that has tried since 1984 to help make phones affordable by discounting installation fees or subsidizing monthly charges. The cost was still too high for many people. SafeLink is the first totally free project.
And yes, says Fuentes, his company hopes recipients use the cells to find employment and become regular customers after the free year is up. They'll be able to keep the handsets and buy TracFone's small-denomination calling cards.Studies have shown lack of telephone access is a huge problem for those who've fallen by the economic wayside. They can't get callbacks if they're job searching and risk confidence-killing isolation. "Back in the 1980s, people were asking for a basic telephone allowance within welfare assistance," says Torjman. "But it was decided not to do that."

Although communications are vitally important, the reality of government budgets is that the competing needs of the marginalized have to be prioritized, she says. "I'd want needs like food, shelter, heating costs, school supplies, dental and medical care to be met before we explored free cellphones."

And yet a SafeLink program "seems a practical approach" to a significant problem, says Sarah Blackstock, policy analyst at the Income Security Advocacy Centre. In Ontario, 99.3 per cent of households have a phone, whether home line or cell, she notes. "Access isn't a problem, but affordability – upfront connection fees, monthly charges – is."

The result is that low-income people often sacrifice other essentials: "It makes for difficult choices. Pay the phone bill and go hungry." The prepaid part of SafeLink is key, Blackstock says, and funding it through phone providers and users is a reasonable approach.Treating the phone as a utility is the brilliance of the U.S. program, thinks John Stapleton, a social services consultant: "I like the fact it's the FCC doing this, not social services. That takes away the stigma of low-income people getting something for free."

SafeLink is subsidized by the FCC's Universal Service Fund, which requires all phone companies – or their customers, if they pass it on to them – to contribute via a monthly $1.25 to $1.50 addition to their bill, like the new 25-cent 911 fee in Canada. The fund reimburses TracFone $10 of the $13.50-per-user monthly cost Stapleton says debate over whether a phone should be a fundamental right is irrelevant "when you look at it as a utility. The idea of a utility is that the same service should go to all people.." A recent report Stapleton completed on the needs of Somali women in Rexdale found that all of them had cellphones. "People were surprised by that, saying, `Is that what they're spending their money on?' These women were using it to keep in touch with their children" – clearly not a luxury.

Certainly, the cellphone is revolutionizing the economic prospects of many of the world's poorest people. According to a recent British study, developing nations that use cellphones have a higher rate of economic growth, attract more foreign investment and help small businesses become more efficient.

Africa is leap-frogging past traditional landlines to become the world's fastest-growing mobile market. Even those in refugee camps depend on prepaid cellphones that are recharged with a generator – and nobody regards them as a luxury.

Jan Chipchase, a developing world "user anthropologist" for the Finnish company Nokia, told The New York Times last year it's "quite viable to regard cellphones as a fundamental right" in certain contexts. "... If you wanted to take phones away from anybody in this world who has them, they'd probably say: `You're going to have to fight me for it. Are you going to take my sewer and water away too?' Maybe you can't put communication on the same level as running water, but some people would."

I'll tell ya hwat Thomas, I receive the 68 minutes a month free service,and if it had not been for that service provided to me, there's a couple of times that my children and I would have been in very serious danger due to the fact that I can not afford to keep a landline.

I agree basic essentials come first, thats why I normally do not have a landline; I put my minimum income towards rent, electricity and gas first (electricity before gas due to the fact I receive HEAP so can figure that assistance into my budget).

I receive about 675 per month, and at this point the only way that is going to increase, is if I can finally get the courts to increase my ex-wifes child support from 6% of her income to the state mandated 25%.

out of 675, 400 of it goes to rent right off the top. 75 -85 goes to electricity every month. that's 485 right there. another 100 goes to oil (instead of gas) for my furnace, there is 585. This leaves me with about one hundred dollars, which goes for basic taxeable groceries, transportation back and forth to the store and medical appointments, copays on medicine, and right now internet/landline as I have a few dollars extra per month more than I did 6 months ago.

So, you tell me that this service is not a neccessity for ANY family or individual in this day and age.

it is a plot to give them brain cancer

here's something else they should get - jobs

life, liberty, and the pursuit of rollover minutes??

I still do not own a cellphone. I do think phones, especially cellphones are a luxury but I have no gripe about impoverished or struggling americans receiving some way to have emergency contact should something go wrong. The world is changing ya know...not sure I like all of it, but on the grand scale this is kind of minor.

what and give up all those benefits?

stand corrected

I didnt see in the op anything about joblessness. I think it is unwise to assume that people are poor because they dont have a job. We have a thing in the US called the WORKING POOR and there are more people in that category than you may think.

Just as you are assuming that because it wasnt referenced it wasn't implied. All up to perception and interpretation.

A few years back I worked for a cellphone company who handled Lifeline. I remember plenty of Lifeline accounts calling in to add other features like unlimited texting. Almost every account I reviewed had added features for cost. Many placed credit cards on file for extra minutes. If they can afford to add features, buy additional minutes, purchase a better phone for the account, etc. they can afford to pay something toward the account.

Not only that, most were very rude and demand extra minutes for free after they used them up in a few weeks.

Although, in some cases I think the free cell is necessary. We had some Native American accounts. They do have to reapply but I think the free phone should come with limits for non-Native American accounts. Give it to them for a year. No job, no phone and free minutes.

Yes I blame that one on George Bush as well ;)

I didn't say it was your fault,
I said I was going to blame you

Out of curiosity,,,,
How was it implied?

All up to perception and interpretation.

ok.

Ok, I have only 1 real question (for now) but let's just "make believe" that I was cool with this handing the cell phones to the poor or as someone may have said earlier the "working poor" Why in the world would they need this....?????

"It includes texting, voicemail, call waiting and caller ID."

Caller ID...are you kidding me??????
Texting what the hell for??????
voicemail...ok, I can see that one
and call waiting...uh...not too sure??????

I remember a time when I worked more than one job, still could not afford a land line in my home, know what I did, I went out and used a public phone. Granted they are becoming more and more obsolete but I worked around it.

I can see giving them phones for emergency calls (for medical purposes and calling 911 only) but minutes to talk, and free texting. Why should they get these things for free when the rest of us have to pay for same service. jmo

the rest of us are paying for that service for them too. The government doesn't have a penny that doesn't come from us