The FCC is grappling with what a fair price should be for placing a call from a correctional facility, Maria reports.

Why it matters: How the FCC implements the Martha Wright-Reed Act, which empowers the agency to cap the cost of a phone or video call made by an incarcerated person, will affect families throughout the country.

State of play: Under the law, signed in January, the FCC must complete the rulemaking between June and December 2024.

• Advocates and telecommunication companies don't agree on what should be factored into the cost of placing a call from prison, a financial burden that often falls on the poorest families in the U.S.
• The agency is reviewing comments from outside groups regarding how best to implement the law.
• It's also determining how it will collect data from companies to determine an appropriate cap.

Catch up fast: Although the Martha Wright-Reed Act gives the FCC the power to regulate video calls for the first time, the agency does have a history of regulating phone calls.

• Today, calls made across state lines have a cap of 12 to 14 cents per minute at larger correctional facilities. At smaller facilities, it's 21 cents per minute.
• Most incarcerated people have ended up paying similar rates for in-state and out-of-state calls — in part because it's difficult for companies to track where the call is going — but some are still paying what advocates say are exorbitant rates.

Meanwhile, the price of placing video calls remains high across the board. The Prison Policy Initiative found the cost varies widely by facility.

• In Montana, for example, a 20-minute video call could cost $12.99 in one county and $5 in another.

The big picture: Activists view prison phone justice as part of the larger issue of mass incarceration. The U.S.' various criminal justice systems — state and federal prisons, local jails and other types of correctional facilities — hold nearly 2 million people behind bars.

• Communication with loved ones is known to reduce recidivism and conflict within facilities.

Yes, but: Getting reliable data from companies will be key to properly assess how much it should cost to place a phone or video call.

Flashback: In 2021 the FCC found that Global Tel Link's cost data was inaccurate and the company "may" have overstated those costs.

• ViaPath, formerly known as GTL, is the largest prison and jail phone provider in the country. ViaPath and Securus, the second largest, control most of the prison phone market.

The other side: Margita Thompson, communications officer for Securus' parent company, Aventiv, said the company supports the Martha Wright-Reed Act and would like the FCC to establish "a uniform rate cap" within and across states that is based on data-driven analysis.

• In a filing, the company says it is already being asked "for an unprecedented level of detail on the demand for, and expenses associated with" incarcerated people's calling services.
• ViaPath, meanwhile, said in its filing that the FCC's existing rate caps for phone calls are "just and reasonable" and provide fair compensation for providers based on data already collected.

What they're saying: "We don't think that starting with the data that comes from a predatory industry that has a history of lying to the FCC is the best place to start," said Bianca Tylek, executive director of advocacy organization Worth Rises.

• "The FCC has for years attempted to address this terrible problem, but we had been limited in the extent to which we can address rates for calls made within a state's borders and consider industry-wide costs," an FCC spokesperson said.
• The FCC's Wireline Competition Bureau in July substantially revised, expanded and updated a new mandatory data collection, which an FCC official said should help ensure providers submit more accurate and consistent data.

What's next: Although the FCC could never require companies to offer a free service, state and local governments that run correctional facilities can choose to treat calls like electricity or heat and cover the expense.

• That's where advocates are looking to continue driving down the cost of correctional facility calls to zero. Colorado, Minnesota, Massachusetts, California and Connecticut have made calls from state prisons free, and 12 other states are considering similar measures.

The FCC needs to juggle a number of factors including correctional facility size and security concerns as it decides just how much a phone call from prison can cost, Maria writes.

Why it matters: It's expensive for families of incarcerated people to stay connected with their loved ones, and the Martha Wright-Reed Act gives the agency the authority to ensure providers charge "just and reasonable rates" for calls.

Cost factors up for debate include:

1. Safety and security: The Martha Wright-Reed Act instructs the FCC to "consider" costs associated with safety and security measures necessary to provide calls.

• Securus said there's "crystal clear" precedent "that the costs of safety and security measures such as recording, monitoring, biometrics and related services are inherent in the provision of communications services to the incarcerated."
• Some advocacy groups, such as Worth Rises, argue that the law just means the agency should study the costs, but isn't required to factor them in.

2. Commissions: The comments period for this rulemaking gives groups an opportunity to help the FCC determine whether the cap should incorporate the money prisons get from the phone company that services the incarcerated people in their facility.

• ViaPath says the Martha Wright-Reed Act "does not disturb" an earlier determination by the D.C. Circuit that commissions should be considered in a cap.
• The practice is seen by some activists as inappropriate kickbacks that shouldn't be factored into the price of a call, while companies and some facilities view it as a cost of doing business, like paying a tax.
• The government can't stop a phone company from treating commissions as a profit-sharing agreement with the facility, but embedding it in the rate as a legitimate cost of doing business doesn't reflect the true nature of the payment, said Cheryl Leanza, a media policy consultant for nonprofits.

3. Size: Facilities with small daily populations have been treated as more expensive to serve because the overhead cost of running the facility is distributed among fewer people.

• ViaPath says the average daily populations tracked by facilities continues to be the best approach to determine how size should impact cost.
• Leanza, speaking for the United Church of Christ's media advocacy arm that she is advising, said advocates are very skeptical that facility size makes any meaningful difference given that the products — call and video service — are digital and offered nationally.
• Stephen Raher, an attorney at Leonard Law Group, said the biggest cost difference is between jails — where people are constantly coming and going — and prisons, with more stable populations.
• "The churn of people through jails means more work to set up and deactivate phone accounts as people come and go. There is conflicting evidence, however, about whether the costs of maintaining these accounts falls on phone providers, facilities or a combination of the two."

"Families, especially Black and Brown families who find that their loved ones are overrepresented in our criminal justice system, can spend hundreds — sometimes thousands — of dollars per year, just to stay in touch with incarcerated loved ones. The power to reach out and make a call can make all the difference in someone's life. Everyone — whether or not they are incarcerated — deserves that opportunity."