Just when you think the moonbats running California can’t get more out there and outlandish finding new and innovative ways to relieve their citizens of their money, they come up with a new scheme. This time, all the teenagers in the valley might well be the victims. Well, their parents anyway. The crowd is Sacramento is going after text messages.
California state regulators are working on a plan to charge cell phone users a fee for text messaging, all in the name of collecting taxpayer money to pay for programs to make phone service cheaper to low-income residents, the San Jose Mercury News reported.
No one yet knows how much cell phone users would be charged, but the News says the fee would “likely would be billed as a flat surcharge per customer — one of those irksome fees at the bottom of your wireless bill — not a fee per text.”
It doesn’t really matter how it is assessed, a fee is a fee.
And cell phone users might have to retroactively pay the fee for the last five years.
Business groups, including the Bay Area Council, California Chamber of Commerce and Silicon Valley Leadership Group and others opposing the idea, calculated the new charges for wireless consumers could total about $44.5 million a year.
But they add that under the regulators’ proposal the charge could be applied retroactively for five years — which they call “an alarming precedent” — and could amount to a bill of more than $220 million for California consumers.
A dense California Public Utilities Commission report laying out the case for the texting surcharge says the Public Purpose Program budget has climbed from $670 million in 2011 to $998 million last year. But the telecommunications industry revenues that fund the program have fallen from $16.5 billion in 2011 to $11.3 billion in 2017, it said.
“This is unsustainable over time,” the report says, arguing that adding surcharges on text messaging will increase the revenue base that funds programs that help low-income Californians afford phone service.
Just what is in the water out there, what little there is of it, that makes politicians think citizens with money are going to stay in the state only to go broke while living there.
[wd_hustle id=”newsletter-signup” type=”embedded”]