I dropped landline service in 2002 because the cost (then) was becoming ridiculous, thus I haven't been aware of how much worse it's become.
In Dave Lazarus' column in today's Los Angeles Times:
there's this tidbit at the end:
" [...] " Speaking of reticence, no one at the California Public Utilities " Commission got back to me when I wrote last week about a state " Senate report on how consumers have gotten short shrift since the " telephone market was deregulated in 2006. " " This week, the commission issued a response: " " " " State regulators say they're miffed that Senate investigators " don't think they're doing a good job of safeguarding consumers " from runaway phone rates. " " "I am disappointed that the report focuses on only a few parts " of the CPUC's efforts to protect and help consumers instead of " recognizing all of our efforts, which are substantial and only " getting better," declared Paul Clanon, executive director of " the agency. " " He said the report "chooses to zero in on large rate increases " for add-on services that not everyone buys, such as unlisted " numbers," rather than citing lower costs for basic phone service, " when the costs are adjusted for inflation. " " As I observed in my column, " " " " those large rate increases include AT&T jacking up its fee for " an unlisted number by more than 600% and its charges for call " waiting and call forwarding by about 86%. " " "Protecting the interests of consumers is what we do, and we do " it well and thoughtfully," Clanon said. "We are constantly " improving and refining our internal processes to give consumers " the best care and assistance possible." " " All appearances to the contrary notwithstanding.