AT&T is about to pull the plug on a service that would leave vulnerable users disconnected
The times in California are changing.

Many of us often dream about being disconnected from the all-seeing, all-knowing, omnipresent Network, but the truth is, for some, being connected and having a phone is crucial – and could even be life-saving.
There's a new California bill that could let AT&T end its duty to provide landlines, shifting users from copper lines to modern networks, a move critics warn could threaten public safety during disasters.
As you may've heard, AT&T currently serves as California's Carrier of Last Resort (COLR), meaning it is legally required to provide basic landline phone service to anyone who requests it, even in remote or unprofitable areas. This obligation ensures that residents without reliable wireless or fiber coverage still have access to essential communication, especially during emergencies.
AT&T argues that the policy is outdated due to the widespread use of mobile and internet-based services, noting that fewer than 5% of Californians still rely on copper landlines. However, removing this requirement could leave vulnerable populations (like seniors and rural communities) without a connection during disasters. While the Public Utilities Commission rejected a similar proposal last year, the debate has now moved to the state legislature.
On top of that, Cali's KABC-TV (Channel 7) reports that AT&T customers' phone service has been suffering due to copper theft.
At a recent Senate Communications Committee hearing, AT&T reiterated its position that the requirement is outdated and no longer reflects the realities of today’s telecommunications market. The company emphasized that copper-based landline networks, once the backbone of voice communication, are now used by less than 5% of Californians and are increasingly costly to maintain compared to fiber and wireless systems.
Assemblywoman Tina McKinnor introduced a bill to support this transition, arguing that most residents already rely on wireless or fiber-based services for their communication needs.
Opponents argue that eliminating this obligation could leave some without essential connectivity, particularly in regions with limited broadband coverage and among seniors who rely on landlines for critical services, such as medical alert systems that may not work over cellular networks.
Labor representatives claim the move prioritizes shareholder profits over public safety, citing cases where residents have gone weeks or months without service after copper lines were damaged.
Proponents of the bill maintain that safeguards are included, requiring AT&T to verify that alternative options (such as wireless or fiber services) are available and affordable before any landline service is discontinued. The bill advanced out of the Senate Communications Committee on a 9-2 vote and now heads to the Senate Judiciary Committee for further review.
Personally, I'm aware that things evolve and we can't expect them to stay around intact forever – but there should really be an up-and-running Plan B before we terminate Plan A. Also, do spend time with your elder relatives and talk to them about newer technologies – sure, they probably don't need the iPhone 17 Pro Max, or some Snapdragon 8 Elite Android flagship, but, hey – how about a simple satellite phone instead?
There's a new California bill that could let AT&T end its duty to provide landlines, shifting users from copper lines to modern networks, a move critics warn could threaten public safety during disasters.
As you may've heard, AT&T currently serves as California's Carrier of Last Resort (COLR), meaning it is legally required to provide basic landline phone service to anyone who requests it, even in remote or unprofitable areas. This obligation ensures that residents without reliable wireless or fiber coverage still have access to essential communication, especially during emergencies.
AT&T argues that the policy is outdated due to the widespread use of mobile and internet-based services, noting that fewer than 5% of Californians still rely on copper landlines. However, removing this requirement could leave vulnerable populations (like seniors and rural communities) without a connection during disasters. While the Public Utilities Commission rejected a similar proposal last year, the debate has now moved to the state legislature.
At a recent Senate Communications Committee hearing, AT&T reiterated its position that the requirement is outdated and no longer reflects the realities of today’s telecommunications market. The company emphasized that copper-based landline networks, once the backbone of voice communication, are now used by less than 5% of Californians and are increasingly costly to maintain compared to fiber and wireless systems.
Assemblywoman Tina McKinnor introduced a bill to support this transition, arguing that most residents already rely on wireless or fiber-based services for their communication needs.
Opponents argue that eliminating this obligation could leave some without essential connectivity, particularly in regions with limited broadband coverage and among seniors who rely on landlines for critical services, such as medical alert systems that may not work over cellular networks.
There was a news story in L.A. just a short while ago where a 90-year-old woman, homebound because of a stroke and other health conditions, went without her landline for two months because the phone company would not repair her phone lines.
– Frank Arce from CWA (Communications Workers of America), 2025
Labor representatives claim the move prioritizes shareholder profits over public safety, citing cases where residents have gone weeks or months without service after copper lines were damaged.
Proponents of the bill maintain that safeguards are included, requiring AT&T to verify that alternative options (such as wireless or fiber services) are available and affordable before any landline service is discontinued. The bill advanced out of the Senate Communications Committee on a 9-2 vote and now heads to the Senate Judiciary Committee for further review.
Personally, I'm aware that things evolve and we can't expect them to stay around intact forever – but there should really be an up-and-running Plan B before we terminate Plan A. Also, do spend time with your elder relatives and talk to them about newer technologies – sure, they probably don't need the iPhone 17 Pro Max, or some Snapdragon 8 Elite Android flagship, but, hey – how about a simple satellite phone instead?
Things that are NOT allowed:
To help keep our community safe and free from spam, we apply temporary limits to newly created accounts: