FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15.2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Joe Baca
U.S. I-louse of Representatives
2366 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Baca:
Thank you for your Ictter cncouraging thc Commission to postponc implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
supp0l1 for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in thc Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you havc notcd, thc Commi sion has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in thc Lifeline R~form Order, the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifclinc-supported service. After careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requiremcnt as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a numbcr of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continucs its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband lor all Americans. Please let me kno\\ if I
can be of any furthcr assistance.
Sinccrely,
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-4 I 8·1 000
,JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
The Honorable George K. Butterfield
U.. House of Representatives
2305 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Butterfield:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implcmcntation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commis ion's efforts to eliminate the waste and abusc in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has madc some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline R~for/l'l Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abusc with thc potential additional burdcn on certain
consumcrs to obtain a Lifelinc-supportcd scrvice. After careful considcration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility ccrtification rcquircment as an intcrim stcp to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have sincc dcvclopcd a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improvcd accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to includc broadband
service. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit fi'om the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advancc acccss to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
Julius Genachowski
445 r 2lH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418- r 000
,JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
The Honorable Russ Carnahan
U. . House of Representatives
1710 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Carnahan:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your leller will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline R~rorm Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. arc allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me kno,"" if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
-
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-, 000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15.2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable William Lacy Clay
U.S. I-louse of Representatives
2418 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington. D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Clay:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record (or Commission
consideration.
As you have noted. the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline RefOrm Order, the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration, the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork (or modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a trong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its cfforts to
advancc acccs to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15.2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings
U.S. House of Rcpresentatives
2235 Rayburn I-louse Office Building
Washington, D. . 20515
Dear Congressman Cummings:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline cligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminatc the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you havc noted. the Commission has made some tough choiccs in rcforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline R~rorm Order, the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abusc with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifclinc-supported service. After carcful considcration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify thc
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developcd a number of innovative solutions to ensurc compliance with the
requircmcnt while minimizing consumer burdcn. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from thc improvcd accountability among other things. arc allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modcrnizing the Lifeline program to includc broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-incomc Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as thc Commission continues its efforts to
advancc access to telecommunications and broadband for all Amcricans. Plcase let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
incerely,
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15, 2012
The Honorable Ted Deutch
U.S. House of Representatives
1024 Longworth House Office Building
Washington. D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Deutch:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility cel1ification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted. the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Reforlll Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration, the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps arc also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its effol1s to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me kno,", if [
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
ulius Genachowski
445 12lH 5TREETS.W. WASHINGTON. D.C 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Keith Ellison
.. House of Representatives
1027 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Ellison:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commis ion's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be ineluded in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have nored. the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the LiFeline Reform Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration, the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim stcp to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please Ict me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
,JULIUS GENACHQWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Raul M. Grijalva
U.S. Housc of Representatives
1511 Longworth I louse Orlice Building
Washington, D. . 20515
Dear Congressman Grijalva:
Thank you for your leiter encouraging thc Commission to postponc implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility ccrtilication rcquirements. I value your views and apprcciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your lettcr will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding rccord for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has made somc tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline R~form Order, the Commission
balanced the urgcnt need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certilication requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipient while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providcrs have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance" ith the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while ~ national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability ~mong other things, arc allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benclit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerel) ,
Julius Genaehowski
445 12lH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15.2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Luis Gutierrez
U.S. House of Representatives
2266 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 205 J5
Dear Congressman Gutierrez:
Thank you for your lctter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted. the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming thc
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline R~/iJrnl Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providcrs have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things, are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps arc also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
.June 15. 2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Alcee L. Hastings
U.S. House of Representatives
2353 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Ilastings:
Thank you for your leller cncouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will bc included inthc Lifcline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you havc noted, the Commission has madc somc tough choiccs in rcforming thc
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline R~forll1 Order, the Commission
balanced the urgcnt nced to stem wastc and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Li fel ine program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Pleasc let me know if I
ean be of any further assistance.
.Julius Gcnachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15, 2012
The Honorablc Ruben Hinojosa
U.S. I-Iousc of Representatives
2262 Rayburn House Officc Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dcar Congressman Hinojosa:
Thank you for your leiter encouraging thc Commission to postpone implcmentation of
the new Lifeline eligibility cel1ification requirements. I value your vicws and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your leiter will be includcd in thc Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, thc Commission has made some tough choices in reforming thc
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Reform Order, the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stcm waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifelinc-supported service. After careful consideration, the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requircment as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipicnts while it transitions to a national eligibility databasc.
Providers have sincc dcveloped a number of innovativc solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service. which wc agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twcnty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation lor a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its cfforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Amcricans. Please let me know if I
can be of any furthcr assistance.
Sincerely,
Julius Genachowski
445 121>< STREETS.W. WASHINGTON, D,C, 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Junc 15, 2012
,JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Larry Kissell
U.S. House of Representativcs
1632 Longworth I louse Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Kissell:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postponc implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abusc in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifcline reform proceeding record lor Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Reform Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stcm waste and abusc with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After carcful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to vcrify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developcd a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliancc with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifclinc program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Amcricans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our stcps are also ensuring a strong loundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREETS.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
..JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Barbara Lee
U.S. Iiouse of Representatives
2267 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congresswoman Lee:
Thank you for your letter encouraging thc ommission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your lettcr will be included in the Lifcline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Reform Order, the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. Alier careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Provider have since developed a number of innovative solutions lo ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing con umer burden, while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
ommission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-firsl
century cconomy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and la ting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advancc access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me kno" if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
•
445 12TH 5TREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-4 I 8-1 000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
..JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable John Lewis
U.S. House of Representatives
343 Cannon House Office Building
Washington. D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Lewis:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be ineluded in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Reform Order, the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-lirst
century economy. Our steps arc also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
-
ulius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
The Honorable Ben Ray Lujan
U.S. I-louse of Representatives
330 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Lujan:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted. the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Rejiu'lI1 Order, the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem wastc and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it tran itions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband lor all Americans. Please Ictmc know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
-
Julius Genachowski
445 12lH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-' 000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15.2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Gregory W. Meeks
U.S. House of Representatives
2234 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington. D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Meeks:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the L(Feline Reform Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. Arter careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. \\hile a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service. which we agree is critical for lo\\-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are al 0 ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its effort to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
445 12TH STREETS.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202'418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Brad Miller
U.S. House of Representatives
1127 Longworth I-louse Ol'lice Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
DcaI' Congressman Miller:
Thank you for your Ictter encouraging the Commission to postpone implemcntation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requiremcnts. 1 value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminatc the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will bc included in thc Li feline rcform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission ha made some tough choiccs in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requiremcnt in the LiFeline ReFmn Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem wastc and abusc with the potcntial additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifelinc-supported scrvice. After careful consideration. the ommission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to vcrify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers havc since developed a numbcr of innovative solutions to cnsure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burdcn. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay thc groundwork for modcrnizing the Lifcline program to include broadband
scrvice. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to bcnc!it (i'om the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline progranl.
I look forward to \\orking with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
-
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH 5TREET S.W WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202'418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Grace F. Napolitano
U.S. House of Representatives
1610 Longworth I-louse Officc Building
Washington. D.C. 20515
Dear Congresswoman Napolitano:
Thank you for your leuer encouraging thc Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility ccrtification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for thc Commission's cfforts to eliminate the wastc and abuse in this important program.
Your leuer will bc included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you havc noted. the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requircment in the Lifeline Re/iIl'/11 Order, the Commission
balanced the urgcntneed to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumcrs to obtain a Lifeline-supported servicl:. After careful consideration. thc Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requircment as an intcrim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility databasc is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things, are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and la ting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecoml11unications and broadband for all Americans. Pleasl: Ict me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
•
Julius Genachowski
445 121>< STREET 5.W. WASHINGTON, D.C, 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15.2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton
U.S. House of Representatives
2136 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congresswoman Norton:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the ne" Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's eflorts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Reform Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem wastc and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration, the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have ince developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure eompliancl:: with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. arc allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to inelude broadband
service. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
-
Julius Genachowski
445 121>< STREET S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 • 202·418" 000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Ed Pastor
U.S. House of Rcpresentatives
2465 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Pastor:
Thank you for your lettcr encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline cligibility ccrtification rcquiremcnts. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your leiter will be includcd in the Lifcline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you havc noted, the Commission has made some tough choiccs in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requircment in thc Lifeline Re/orlll Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem wastc and abusc with the potential additional burdcn on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifelinc-supported service. After careful consideration, the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requircment as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have sincc developed a numbcr of innovative solutions to ensure compliancc with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things, are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
ccnturyeconomy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Amcricans. Plcase lelmc know if I
can be of any further assistance.
ulius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
.JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Pedro R. Pierluisi
U.S. '-louse of Representatives
1213 Longworth I louse Office Building
Washington. D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Pierluisi:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implemcntation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted. the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline R4iJl'/Il Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration, the COl11mi sion
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have sincc developed a numbcr of innovative solutions to cnsure compliance with thc
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the ommission continues its effort to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Amcrieans. Please let mc know if I
can be of any furthcr assistance.
Sincerely.
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15.2012
,JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable David E. Price
U.S. I-louse of Representatives
2162 Rayburn I louse Of'lice Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Price:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implemcntation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
suppol1 for the Commission's efforts 10 eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Reform Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers 10 obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility cel1ification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have sincc developed a number of innovati\ e solutions to ensure compliance \I ith the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibilit) database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
,JULIUS GENACHQWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Charles B. Rangcl
U.S. House of Reprcsentativcs
2354 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Rangel:
Thank you for your ICller cncouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your leller will be includcd inthc Lifelinc rcform proceeding record for Commi sion
consideration.
As you have notcd. the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the ccrtification requircment in the Lifeline Reform Order. thc Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. Aftcr careful consideration. thc Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification rcquiremcm as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers havc since developed a number of innovative solutions to cnsure compliancc with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility database is
devcloped. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing thc
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifcline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from thc twemy-first
century economy. Our stcps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Li fcl ine program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance acccss to telccommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please Ictme know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
Julius Genachowski
44512THSTREETS.W WASHINGTON,DC 20554.202'418'1000
cP""u~~~( .. \~ I I.o •. .C'~I,fISSP"
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15.2012
The Iionorable Silvestrc Reyes
U.. House of Represcntativcs
2210 Raybum House Officc Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Reyes:
Thank you for your Ictter encouraging the Commission to postponc implemcntation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and apprcciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding rccord for Commission
consideration.
As you have notcd. the Commission has made somc tough choices in rcforming the
Lifeline program. In the ccrtification requirement in thc Lifeline Re/iJrll1 Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem wastc and abusc with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful considcration, thc Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have sincc dcvclopcd a numbcr of innovative solutions to ensure compliancc with the
requircment while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to includc broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-incomc Americans to bcnefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our teps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance acccss to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerc Iy.
ulius Genachowski
445 12TH STREETS.W. WASHINGTON, D,C, 20554 .202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15, 2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Laura Richardson
U.S. House of Representatives
1330 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congresswoman Richardson:
Thank) ou (or your leller encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted. the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline R~forlll Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration, the ommission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork (or modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps arc also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with) ou further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
ulius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202'4 I 8-1 000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15.2012
I..!ULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Lucille Roybal-Allard
U.S. I-louse of Rcprcsentatives
2330 Rayburn Ilouse Officc Building
Washington, D.C. 205 I5
Dear Congresswoman Roybal-Allard:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline cligibility ccrtification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the ommission's efforts to climinate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your lettcr will be ineludcd in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted. thc Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In thc ccrtification requirement in Lhe Lifeline R~/()rlll Order. thc Commission
balanced thc urgcnt need to stem waste and abusc with the potential additional burden on ccrtain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supportcd service. Artcr careful consideration, the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility ccrtification requirement as an interim step to verify thc
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients whilc it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have sincc developed a number of innovative solutions to cnsurc compliancc with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. whilc a national eligibilit) database is
developcd. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allO\>\ing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Li feline program.
I look forward to working with you flllther as the Commission continucs its efforts LO
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Amcricans. Please let mc know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREETS.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15.2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Robert C. Scott
U.S. I louse of Represel1latives
1201 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Scott:
Thank you lor your Icttcr cncouraging thc Commission to postpone implemcntation of
the new Lifeline cligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commi sion
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Reform Order. the Commission
balanced the urgent need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. After careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me kno" if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
Julius Genaehowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Iionorable Albio Sires
.S. House of Representatives
2342 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Sires:
Thank you for your lener encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your lellcr will be included in the Lifelinc reform procccding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has made some tough choict:s in rcforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Li/eline Re/orlll Order. the Commission
balanct:d the urgentnccd to stem wastc and abusc with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. Aftcr careful consideration, the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burdcn. while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modcrnizing the Lifelinc program to includt: broadband
service. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit frolll the twenty-first
century economy. Our steps are also cnsuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with) ou further as the Commission cuntinucs its efforts to
advancc access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Plcase It:t me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson
U.S. House of Representatives
2466 Rayburn Ilouse Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Thompson:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you havc noted, the Commission has made some tough choices in reforming the
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Reform Order, the Commission
balanced the urgent necd to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. Arter careful consideration. the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility certification requirement as an interim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solution to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improved accountability among other things, arc allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifeline program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from the t\\enty-first
century economy. Our steps are also en uring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
-
Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000
,JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
The Honorable Edolphus Towns
U.S. House of Repre entatives
2232 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington. D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Towns:
Thank you for your letter encouraging the Commission to postponc implemelllation of
the new Lifeline eligibility certification requirements. I value your views and appreciate your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminatc the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be included in the Lifeline reform proceeding record for Commission
consideration.
As you have noted, the Commission has madc some tough choices in reforming thc
Lifeline program. In the certification requirement in the Lifeline Reform Order, the Commission
balanced thc urgent need to stem waste and abusc with the potential additional burden on certain
consumers to obtain a Lifeline-supportcd scrvice. After careful considcration, the Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility cel1ification requirement as an intcrim step to verify the
eligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility database.
Providers have since developcd a number of innovative solutions to ensurc compliance with the
requiremcnt while minimizing consumer burden, while a national eligibility database is
developed. The savings from the improvcd accountability among other things. are allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modernizing the Lifelinc program to include broadband
service, which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to benefit from thc l\\enty-first
century economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifeline program.
I look forward to working with you further as the Commission continucs its cfforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let me know if I
can be of any further assistance.
incerely.
•
Julius Genachowski
445 r 2TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 • 202-4,8-,000
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
June 15,2012
,JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
CHAIRMAN
The Honorable Melvin Wan
U.S. House of Representativcs
2304 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington. D.C. 20515
Dear Congressman Wan:
Thank you for your letter encouraging thc Commission to postpone implementation of
the new Lifeline eligibility ccrtification requirements. I value your views and apprcciatc your
support for the Commission's efforts to eliminate the waste and abuse in this important program.
Your letter will be ineluded in the Lifelinc rcform proceeding record for Commission
considcration.
As you havc noted, the Commission has made some tough choices in rcforming thc
Lifeline program. In the certification requiremcnt in the Lifeline Reform Order. the Commission
balanced thc urgcnt need to stem waste and abuse with the potential additional burdcn on ccrtain
consumcrs to obtain a Lifeline-supported service. Artcr carcful considcration. thc Commission
unanimously adopted the eligibility ccrtification requirement as an interim step to vcrify thc
cligibility of all Lifeline recipients while it transitions to a national eligibility databasc.
Providers have since developed a number of innovative solutions to ensure compliance with the
requirement while minimizing consumer burden. while a national eligibility database is
dcveloped. The savings from the improvcd accountability among other things. arc allowing the
Commission to lay the groundwork for modcrnizing the Lifeline program to ineludc broadband
service. which we agree is critical for low-income Americans to bcnefit from thc t\\cllly-first
ccntury economy. Our steps are also ensuring a strong foundation for a strong and lasting
Lifelinc program.
I look forward to working with you further as thc Commission continues its efforts to
advance access to telecommunications and broadband for all Americans. Please let mc kno\\ if I
can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely.
.Julius Genachowski
445 12TH STREET S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20554 • 202-418-1000