"...it seems unlikely the industry is going to hand over just shy of $5bn without a fight."

Right. And we all know where that extra money is going to come from: our wallets.

I mean seriously, we'll just see an extra "Spectrum license user fee" tacked on to our bills. It's added to the Carrier's bill, and they'll turn right around and add it to ours.

But at least it's not a tax increase, right? ...right???

Business as usual. Wonderful. We overpay now for a convenience that goes down in an earthquake or with sunspots and now we're going to get charged more because Obama needs the cash? He really can't be that stupid to think that the company isn't just going to pass the increase on to the consumers.

Ah well, pas the lighter fluid. Rome is burning and I don't know how to play the fiddle.

"...raising $4.8bn over the next decade, which could go some way towards addressing America's $1.7trn budget deficit."

$1,700,000,000,000 deficit is for one year, $4,800,000,000 over ten years is a finger in the dike.

There's already precedent for doing this. As the airwaves in the US are, by law, owned by government in trust for the public, the Fed can charge usage fees. Just ask anyone who buys any software. You're only buying a "license", not the product. So the software house can keep gouging you for for $5 of code or take you to court for letting anyone else use your copy of the software.

Is there anyone from whom he will not steal?

Who does he think is really going to pay? New rate plan: $12.00 /min peak, $11.99 /text message and unlimited nights & weekends only $1099.00/month. I can see a rebirth of pay phones with one popping up on every corner, VISA & MC accepted. Gold cards only please.

While i think it would be ridiculous if the gov't got away with charging a fee like that, it really would be nice for the mobile operators to know what it feels like to be a plain ol' user gouged at whim.

I almost bet he's going to turn it around on them when the lawyers start complaining (Wishful thinking). If the operators don't want to be gouged, they shouldn't gouge their customers.

But this is definitely a strange way to open a dialogue about Net Neutrality.

And I know for a fact that when the Chevy gets to the levy, not only will it be dry, but the operators will be crying poor and looking for their bailout.

Does anyone present really think that the likes of Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint are going to eat $4.8Bn in additional expenses while keeping their pricing structures the same?

Didn't think so.

Corporations don't pay tax. They just don't. Whatever their taxes amount to, they pass through to their customers in the form of higher prices. The margins upon which they operate stay remarkably consistent year on year, unless the company finds a technology breakthrough that allows a dramatic improvement in productivity per unit of cost, in which case the margins go up. So whether the mobile telcos win or lose their bid to knock back this new fee (tax), is almost immaterial - you can rest assured that they won't end up eating the loss on it if they do fail to to convince the government on the issue - their customers will.

This is a fairly typical government ploy - make a big show about how they aren't going to raise taxes on the little guy, then take a number of actions that end up costing the little guy a bunch more money to keep his lifestyle the same. But they didn't raise taxes, right? True to their word, right? Just an honest pol doing his honest day's work, right?

Riiiiight.

Wiireless companies been buying up spectrum and just sitting on it but now Cableco's(TWC and Comcast) who are thristy for that spectrum will force the big two(att and Verizon) into massive bidding wars against them

First and foremost, I'm not an Obama supporter.

That said, he isn't the guilty party in this decision. AT&T and the rest of wireless carriers have been raping their customers for YEARS now and putting all of that extra money towards ANYTHING useful is better than into a rich CEO's pocket. I'm sure AT&T will pass this along to their consumers as well, but that's our beef with AT&T, not Obama.

I suppose it will have to happen? But it will be a shame if it has to.

Q: How will western 'free world' governments finance the indulgences, lifestyles, bonuses and income of its finance sector?

A: by upping all revenues of stuff that are robust through the finance sector folly.

Corollary: anything that is presently returning a profit will be taxed to the hilt?

Shame:

As in the case of RBS ex-chair running an income of some £11,000 per day (yes, per day! Yes, per 365 days a year!) now allegedly on a pension of some £1,800 per day (Yes! Per day!) the best way is to seek at least some satisfaction from those that brought the event about. It also begs the question: what was the lump sum? And possibly: isn't that small beef compared to the bonuses claimed by some immediately before some institutions went bankrupt?

Alternatively

Unlike the UK (going for legal advice on how to recoup the gross overpayments) perhaps the best way for the public to recover at least a part of the theft is to say "Yes, you can have all of your pension as agreed. Yes, we will freeze it until our investigations have been completed and then you will lose it"?

1 - each of the individuals and corporations involved with bonus payments or high incomes should be invited to create a government observed fund using their own income as a means to finance organisations through the credit folly they started (polluter pays principles)

2 - if 1 above is not doable merely seize all personal assets on the basis that 'normal rules of engagement do not exist due to exceptional circumstances'

3 - a perception of 'toxic loans' should be done away with soonest. It merely conveys a sense of misappropriated money that has ended up as high income, pensions or bonus payments to individuals in the finance sector

'nuff said?

... it ain't spelt s-a-c-r-IT guys.