What was the point of breaking up AT&T into 'baby bells' if they were all monopolies in thei

What's the difference between one monopoly and dozens of monopolies spread throughout the country?

AT&T was one of the Baby Bells. In 1976 the 'monopoly' was banned and local competition was instituted. At that time AT&T became a Long Distance only provider.

The 'Bells' were restricted from offering LD until October of 2002.

The FCC instructed the Bells where they could no longer provide phone service - and still cannot in those areas. And yes - there are areas in every state that cannot have a Bell or the new AT&T - the providers vary, but include, McCloud, TDS, Sprint and MCI.

In the areas that are currently provided for by AT&T (formerly a Local Bell) there are competitive options available to the consumer. I say competitive because there are choices - I do not mean that the service/quality/features, etc, are equitable to the Bells - just that the choice is there.

Until 2005 the Bells did support the infrastructure for all land lines. Even if you had service through another provider the lines you used were built and maintained by the bells. Part of breaking up the bells was that they had to provide the lines to their competition for a set rate.

Over the years (until 2004) that rate was not allowed to be increased. It came down to the facts and the facts were finally heard. The cost to the Bells to maintain the lines (I don't remember the exact figures so the next set of numbers are ficticious - but you will get the drift.) ran approx. $1.00 per day for 1 mile of the line. They had to allow their competitors to 'rent' and resell that line for $0.20 cents. Needless to say - the cost was restrictive and unfair (guess who had to pay the extra $0.80 cents - yup - their customers and the tax payers. Meanwhile - the competition was pocketing the profits because they kept their prices equal to or just under the bells! Talk about rip off!)