Capitol Ideas

By donald

February 7, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this

Yes they should get involved. i shouldnt have to sign another contract after spending $300 dollars on a phone.

By Peter

February 7, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this

No, the gov’t should not get involved. People should just not sign contracts and find a company who doesn’t require it. Soon, they will drop the requirement if enough people object. “Free enterprise rules best”

By Jane

February 7, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this

Yes - I fell like I am being held captive by the cell phone companies because of the big fees that I would have to pay if I leave before the contract is up. Why can’t I shop around for the best deal more often? This bill seems like it would just force the cell phone companies to offer us better deals.

By steve

February 7, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this

Yes the government should get involved. I like getting the free phones, but why should I have to sign a contract? They should be required to provide free phones maybe once a year or so. It’s not fair for me to pay $29.99 for a phone that costs them nothing. They should also not be allowed to stick you with late payment fees or turn the phone off. We depend these things and all they care about is money.

By Karl

February 7, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this

No— If they require a new contract for any reason, just go to another conpany. And you should let corporate know why.

By Patti Jeffries

February 7, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

No. The government should not be involved. If you do not want to sign a contract, do not use that company — go somewhere else.

By John

February 7, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this

No. The cell phone companies don’t get the phones for free. If they give you a discount, how do they know that you wont turn off your service and leave in two weeks and keep the phone. They would then be out the difference in the phone they discounted for you. I do have a problem when they make you signa contract to change your plan or add any feature. The phone I can understand, but not that. That’s why we always have a choice. Millions of people don’t have cell phones. If you don’t like the way it’s run don’t get one!!!!!

By Larry

February 7, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this

Yes - I can’t get a cell phone without signing a contract. The cell phone companies change the terms of my contract all the time and if I want to make one small change, I’m stuck with the same cell phone company for another two years. That’s wrong. What happened to consumer choice, man?

By Peter Hoover

February 7, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

If you get the cellphone for free, then the cell company should have a right to expect a contract. I think 2 years is excessive. Should be for one year. Regardless of the length, if you are committed to a certain length of time, there should be an automatic warranty to cover the phone for the length of the contract. Too often the phones stop work, or stop charging, or stop dialing properly through normal use, and that is not right. Thern you have to go buy a new phone, and extend your contract. It’s a trap. But nobdoy should have to extend a contract just because the usage needs change. It is very customer unfreindly, and of course corporate greed at its worst.

By tamara

February 7, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this

For all of you that say just choose another company I would like to know exactly which ones do not require a contract. Last time I checked they ALL did. I live in an area that only verizon will pick up in so I’m very limited to choices, but if there’s one out there; let me know! And I say YES…it’s past time that the government got involved. These cell phone companies have been robbing us for years and our hands are tied. If you want a phone, you sign their contract and that’s the only option you have. Buy a new phone, sign the contract or it won’t get turned on, etc. It’s been a legal scam for years and it’s time to stop them!

By John

February 7, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this

Metro PCS does not require a contract. They may not work everywhere you want them to, but they don’t have contracts. If you don’t want a contract go prepaid. It may cost you more, but you won’t have your contract.

By Al

February 7, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this

Yeah!! The government should take over the entire telecom industry, and give out free service to everyone. And they should make McDonalds give out free McChickens, because I shouldn’t have to pay $1 for one, and then just get hungry again later! And they should make gas free too, because it is too expensive and people are making too much money selling it. Can you believe it? People are making money off of the things I have to buy, and that just isn’t fair.

Gimme a break. What kinda commies are in our state gov? Is there an election coming up?

By Wes

February 7, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this

Yes they should get involved. All I wanted to do was change the area code on my cell phone number since I moved here from TN; of course they wanted to charge me to break my contract and sign a new one with the new local area code.

By Calvin

February 8, 2006 08:51 AM | Link to this

Yes. I recently dropped my phone and had to have a new one. The company forced me to sign a contract extension just to purchase a new phone. Thatule is ridiculous and should be eliminated. And, just as soon as I can, I will be switching providers even if the new company charges more. That will be my way of protesting the rule.

By Bill

February 8, 2006 09:01 AM | Link to this

What’s a cell phone?

By Bill

February 8, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this

What’s a cell phone?

By Van

February 8, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this

Folks, we seem to think of the cell phone as a right or something we can not live without. It isn’t.

I have had a cell phone since the days they came in a bag with a shoulder strap. They were big and the batteries made them heavy. I have over the years signed several 1 year contracts. This is no big deal. The company I use also lets me change phone periodically without penalty.

As to the “expensive” phones, this is a non issue for me. I want a phone that can make and receive calls. Beyond that it does not make sense. As a camera, it is terrible, as a MP3 player, questionable, as a internet device, laughable.

A general purpose phone does not cost $300 and anyone that pays that much for the latest fad, should not complain about signing a contract, the bubble head deserves it.

THIS IS A USEFUL TOOL, NOT A RIGHT.

By Jack

February 8, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this

No, keep this legislature out of it. Everytime they do something to “help” the consumer it ends up costing us (the consumers) more money. They will end up siding with the wireless carriers and the length of the contract will be extended and the cost of the change fees will increase. I’d find a company that doesn’t require a long-term contract.

By Ralph

February 13, 2006 01:29 PM | Link to this

I agree with this bill proposal. My T-Mobile phone got washed in laundry so I needed another one. Since I had service only 6 months, T-Mobile wanted me to sign another contract since I could not get free upgrade. So I went to Kmart and got a prepaid Nokia for 39 bucks, put the old SIM card in it (Still worked after being washed!) and now have new phone without the BS of having to sign another contract. I hope this bill passes.

By Brison

February 13, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this

LEGISLATE – PLEASE!! These cell phone policies are designed by con-artist. The policies, which are rarely disclosed, make it extremely difficult to switch to a better carrier due to the customers’ loss of money on proprietary equipment & contract termination penalties. Sprint has their rip-off technique down to a science: They prolong their investigative decisions about our phone equipment problems until it is out of warranty. We are either forced to buy second /third replacement phone or forced pay $250 to get out of a “contract” that we customers were never informed of when encouraged to buy the previous replacement phone to solve the Sprint reception problems. Sprint always blames the reception problems on the phones, and suggest that the customer buy a new phone. After 8 phones, I guarantee that the only problem lies with Sprint and their refusal to provide decent tech or customer service for their clientele.

By Van

February 13, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this

Folks, Please remember the natural gas de-regulation - it could happen with cell phones too.