[1] COR's membership includes the following organizations: Alexander Graham Bell Association, American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, American Deafness and Rehabilitation Association, American Society for Deaf Children, American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Auditory-Verbal International, Inc., The Caption Center, Conference of Educational Administrators Serving the Deaf, Convention of American Instructors of the Deaf, League for the Hard of Hearing, National Association of the Deaf, National Captioning Institute, National Cued Speech Association, Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Self Help for Hard of Hearing People, Inc., Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc.

    [2] 1996 Act [[section]]254(b).

    [3] AFB Comments at 2. AFB demonstrates this point by noting that accessible communications networks now enable people who are blind to read newspapers. Similarly, the Internet is rapidly become indispensable for communication among, and information gathering by, persons who are deaf and hard of hearing.

    [4] Notice at [[paragraph]]3; see discussion on this point in the Comments of Joint Commenters at 5-6.

    [5]Pub. L. No. 97-410, codified as amended at 47 U.S.C. [[section]]610 (1988).

    [6] See 47 U.S.C. [[section]]610(g). Congress took this action to counter the potentially negative effects of an FCC ruling separating the sale and rental of customer premises equipment from regulated services. Second Computer Inquiry, 77 F.C.C. 2d 384, 446-47 1980), recon. 84 F.C.C. 2d 50 (1981), further recon. 88 FCC 2d 512 (1981), aff'd sub nom. Computer & Communications Indus. Assoc. v. FCC, 693 F. 2d 198 (D.C. Cir. 1982). Because many telephone companies had been offsetting the high costs of providing specialized equipment, such as text telephones and artificial larynxes, with revenues from other services, the FCC's ruling might have caused persons with disabilities to bear the full costs of their equipment.

    [7] H.R. Rep. No. 888, 97th Cong., 2d Sess. 4 (1982) (emphasis added).

    [8] 47 U.S.C [[section]]610(b).

    [9] Pub. L. No. 100-394, codified at 47 U.S.C. [[section]]610 (1988).

    [10] H.R. Rep No. 674, 100th Cong., 2d Sess. 7 (1988). Noting that the telephone is a "major and indispensable part in the business and social lives of all Americans," the House Committee on Energy and Commerce concluded that, without telephone access, individuals with hearing disabilities "are put at a significant disadvantage, id. at 3, [and that] . . .[t]he inability to use all the telephones imposes social and economic costs on not only the hearing impaired, but the whole nation." Id. at 7.

    [11] Pub. L. No. 101-336, codified at 47 U.S.C. [[section]]225.

    [12] S. Rep No. 116, 101st Cong., 1st Sess. 77-78 (1989).

    [13] See Reply Comments of United Cerebral Palsy Associations; Reply Comments of NAD et. al.

    [14] Notice at [[paragraph]]16.

    [15] Notice at [[paragraph]]19.

    [16] 1996 Act [[section]]254(h).

    [17] Notice at [[paragraph]]72.

    [18] For example, although certain speed links may be adequate for transmitting talking head style lectures, a higher capacity, higher speed link would be necessary, and should be incorporated in universal service principles, to enable two way interactive conferencing in sign language in real time for deaf students.

    [19] For example, the Communications Act requires that "users of telecommunications relay services pay rates no greater than the rates paid for functionally equivalent voice communications services." 47 U.S.C. [[section]]225(d)(1(D).

    [20] Notice at [[paragraph]]56.

    [21] A uniform TTY discount program could easily be incorporated into the Lifeline and Link Up discount programs.

    [22] Notice at [[paragraph]]43, citing Section 214(e)(1).