The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted Thursday to cap the prices prisoners and their families pay for phone or video calls.

Before the proposed change, inmates in small prisons were charged as much as $12.10 for a 15-minute phone call, and $11.35 in large prisons. However, with the implementation of the new rules, these charges will be capped at nominal amounts, making communication much more accessible and convenient. The proposed changes would set per-minute price limits for audio and video calls, depending on the location of incarceration. In large prisons, the amount charged for audio calls would be capped at $0.06 per minute, and in small prisons, it would be capped at $0.09 per minute. Video call charges would similarly be capped at $0.11 per minute and $0.14 per minute for large and small prisons, respectively.

The change was made possible in large part by the recently passed Martha Wright-Reed Just and Reasonable Communications Act of 2022. The law, which amends the Communications Act of 1934, requires the “Federal Communications Commission to ensure fair and reasonable charges for telephone and advanced communications services in correctional and detention facilities.”

A written statement from FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel revealed that the current change is rooted in a petition filed years ago by Martha Wright-Reed, in which she called on the FCC to address the “unreasonable fees” that families of prisoners were being charged just to talk to their loved ones. She went on to state that:

For prisoners and their loved ones, talking isn’t cheap. People in prison are often separated from their families by hundreds of miles, and families often don’t have the time or resources to visit regularly. So public phone calls are often the only way to stay in touch. But the price of a one-on-one call can be as high as many of us pay for an unlimited monthly subscription. This isn’t just a drain on household budgets. It hurts all of us, because regular contact with family can reduce recidivism.

Commissioner Brendan Carr, on the other hand, issued a statement supporting the change but also expressing reservations about the specific model:

As for the details, a rate structure like this must balance two competing goals, as the relevant statutory provisions make clear. Not only must the FCC ensure that charges are fair and reasonable, but the agency must also preserve the incentives to invest in and serve prisoners by taking into account the unique costs of providing Incarcerated People’s Communications Services (IPCS).

When I first read the draft of today’s FCC decision, I was concerned that the article went too far in one direction and contained too many corrections that could ultimately work against the interests of prisoners, their families, IPCS providers, state prisons, and the public safety officials who run these institutions.