 the result of the frustration that the Bell compa- nies felt in trying to free themselves from the shackles of the 1982 AT&T decree. They negotiated their potential freedom by agreeing to the regula- tory requirements built into the 1996 act in return for eventual entry into long-distance services, including those required to function in the Internet economy. Six years after the passage of the 1996 act, the Bell companies had still not attained the freedom they had bargained for in Congress. By the mid- dle of 2002, they had obtained approval for long-distance entry in states that accounted for only about one-third of the country's access lines (see table 5-2). The slow pace of state and FCC approval had kept them from attempting to develop long-distance networks, Internet backbones, and related Internet services. Moreover, regulators had refused to relieve them of regulating the facilities required to deliver broadband digital subscriber line (DSL) services. By early 2004, however, they had shed some of these shack- les. Between June 2002 and December 2003, the Bell companies received Effect of the 1996 Act on Incumbent Local Companies Table 5-2. Regulatory Approval of Bell Company Entry into in-Region InterLATA Services Switched access Date of lines, 12/31/01 Company State approval (thousands) Verizon New York 12/99 12,591 Texas 10,399 Kansas, Oklahoma 2,825 Verizon Massachusetts 4,374 Verizon Connecticut 2,390 Verizon Pennsylvania 7,929 Arkansas, Missouri 11/01 4,050 Verizon Rhode Island Verizon Vermont BellSouth Georgia, Louisiana 6,437 Verizon Maine, New Jersey 7,835 BellSouth Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina 15,724 Verizon Delaware, New Hampshire 1,389 Verizon Virginia 10/02 4,696 BellSouth Florida, Tennessee 12/02 13,682 California 12/02 22,285 Qwest Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, 12/02 10,841 Nebraska, North Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wyoming Verizon D.C., Maryland, West Virginia 5,795 Nevada 1,309 Qwest New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota 3,119 Qwest Minnesota 2,230 Michigan 5