House bill could force carriers to offer no-contract phones

You'd have to pay full price for a contract-free phone, however. Also mandated in the proposal: better coverage maps, no penalties for canceling contracts in the first 30 days, and detailed cost breakdowns for wireless plans.

CNET News reports that the bill, proposed by Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, is slated for a House subcommittee hearing this week. CNET also points out that the proposal is similar to a Senate bill from last year that called for (among other items) pro-rated early termination fees, which the big four carriers have since willingly adopted (well, to one degree or another, at least).

Like the Senate bill, the new proposal from Rep. Markey has quite a ways to go before it becomes law. If passed, however, the legislation would force carriers to offer phones without contracts—yep, that's right, no piece of paper handcuffing you to a carrier for two years.

Naturally, there'd be a catch: you'd have to pay full price for any such no-contract phones. For example, instead of paying $400 and signing a two-year contract with AT&T for an 8GB iPhone, you'd have to cough up potentially $800 for a no-contract iPhone (assuming, as CNET does, that AT&T subsidizes $400 of the iPhone's total cost). Some EU countries, including France, already mandate that carriers offer unlocked versions of their phones.

While getting a contract-free phone could be a pricey proposition, I'd be happy to see the carriers at least give us the option of going no-contract. Also, Markey's legislation includes other goodies for consumers, such as more detailed coverage maps, more information about early termination fees and taxes, and a 30-day grace period if you do sign a contract. Let's hope the bill finds its way out of the House subcommittee.

So, what do you think—would you fork over more cash to get a contract-free phone?

Related:
Democratic bill could force Apple, AT&T to unlock iPhone [CNET News.com]