NAME: Curt Stamp

TITLE: Executive director

ORGANIZATION: ITTA

PROJECT: Representing mid-sized Independents

In order to get their voices heard in Washington, a very select group of mid-sized Independent telephone companies came together in 1994 to form the Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance. In late September, the group named a new voice as its executive director: Curt Stamp, former commissioner of the Iowa Utilities Board.

Stamp had the backing of two Iowa governors and is active with the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners. He worked with the Iowa Senate for six years after graduating college; then after working on the utilities board as its legislative liaison, he figured it was time to go to law school. He earned his law degree from Drake University in Des Moines.

Stamp's been in Washington for about seven weeks now. He spoke with Telephony's Tim McElligott about his new role and the concerns of the mid-sized carrier.

ON HIS CAREER MOVE:

On the commission in Iowa, I tended to take the lead on telecom issues and got very involved in regional and national issues through NARUC. Given that telecom is where my experience lies, this was an opportunity to take that experience to the next level. This is an exciting organization largely because it is not as big and bureaucratic as some of the other trade associations. We only have 10 members, although it is growing, and a loose management structure, so we are able to be fairly nimble and respond to things on the Hill.

ON THE ASSOCIATION:

This association started in the '92 to '94 time frame as Congress was looking at what became the Telecom Act in '96. There was a lot of attention paid to the smaller rural carriers and a lot of attention being paid to the RBOCs, but our members who fit somewhere in the middle had their own issues. They weren't small enough to get the rural exemption, but they weren't big enough and didn't have the same history of the RBOCs. So they got together and got language inserted in the Telecom Act to take care of them. We thought [the organization] would be a flash in the pan, that we would get that done and be done. But as the rules came out and things changed, there was an ongoing need to have that voice for the mid-sized carriers going forward.

ON THE ISSUES FOR MID-SIZED TELCOS:

We continue to be concerned about universal service. We are trying, to the extent we can, to be active participants in that debate. As for current issues, we support the cap on [Universal Service Fund], just like other associations do, but we have members looking further down the road. We are big supporters of the [2005 Boucher-Terry Bill], which causes a little heartburn for the smaller carriers. Some of

them are more interested in keeping things as they are than others are. We are working with the FCC to implement the cap and then work with and respond to whatever the joint board comes up with on Nov. 1 in terms of their recommendation and anything that continues to move on the Hill. We spend a lot of time talking about broadband — what that looks like going forward. A lot of our companies are out there doing broadband and doing it well, and we have the underlying network that supports many other folks doing broadband. That underlying network needs to continue to be strong for everyone to succeed.

ON THE UTILITY STATUS OF TELCOS:

To a certain degree there are aspects of what our members do that are still clearly public utility in nature, like health and public safety sorts of things and USF obligations. There are situations within the industry that look a lot more like those of traditional regulated monopolies than others, but the more you branch into broadband and entertainment, it starts looking a lot less like a utility and more like just another competitor in the entertainment space. Why should video-on-demand over broadband be treated any differently than a Blockbuster online?