Letters to the editor

Following are responses to a question about the troubles at MCI detailed in a June 16 story, "MCI haunted by vocal critics."

How can the government allow MCI to continue doing business with the government when they disqualified Global Crossing and others from doing business with the government? This is bias toward some businesses and special treatment toward MCI.

In addition, how can people trust the government if it is doing business with a cheater? The people who had stock with MCI were truly hurt and the government is turning its back on the people they are supposed to protect.

Name withheld by request


I am one of the fortunate survivors of the past two years with MCI/WorldCom, having worked for the company more than 20 years.

I have watched many of this industry's best people be laid off since the WorldCom merger. The employees that made MCI what it is are still here trying to rebuild what was a lifetime accomplishment for some of us. This company is us, not a few money-thirsty executives who are not tied to this company any more.

When you cast judgment on the company, remember who you are talking about. It's all the hard-working employees, not a handful of crooked executives. The focus should be on why so few of these executives are jailed for the people and employees who they ruined for the sake of greed.

Name withheld by request


As a former U.S. service member and previous employee of government contractors, I understand the government needs the redundancy of communications carriers in the event of a national disaster.

To protect the U.S. population, I believe MCI must be protected from collapse in order to meet redundancy requirements.

I also believe that MCI is now the leading U.S.-based international carrier, potentially being the primary route for government-related communications in large portions of the world.

To allow the collapse of such an integral Defense Department infrastructure could cost taxpayers significantly more to create an alternate redundant carrier compared to preserving MCI. It is also my opinion that AT&T's breakup was founded on this redundancy mentality, and MCI's creation was partially a result of it.

Name withheld by request


MCI, throughout all the turmoil of the past two years, has continued to provide superlative service to all of its existing government customers. I'm sure I don't need to reiterate the extensive list of agencies for which we provide mission-critical services.

The fact that during MCI's most trying hour, we were still there with no drop in service quality should speak to the level of commitment and dedication which we, the MCI employees, show to all of our customers.

Charles Mantione


We welcome your comments. To send a letter to the editor, use this form.

Please check out the archive of Letters to the Editor for fellow readers' comments.


  • Defense
    Ryan D. McCarthy being sworn in as Army Secretary Oct. 10, 2019. (Photo credit: Sgt. Dana Clarke/U.S. Army)

    Army wants to spend nearly $1B on cloud, data by 2025

    Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy said lack of funding or a potential delay in the JEDI cloud bid "strikes to the heart of our concern."

  • Congress
    Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.) at the Hack the Capitol conference Sept. 20, 2018

    Jim Langevin's view from the Hill

    As chairman of of the Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committe and a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rhode Island Democrat Jim Langevin is one of the most influential voices on cybersecurity in Congress.

Stay Connected


Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.