Securus has had more than its share of negative headlines. In the past few years, the company, which provides technology services to prisons and jails, has been slammed by inmates’ families who say they’re charged outrageous prices to phone loved ones. The controversy has extended into video call and email services, two other places the company has staked a claim. In October, the company was hit with a $1.7 million fine for allegedly misleading the FCC during a regulatory maneuver. By May, attention shifted to another scandal, as the company took heat for enabling warrantless cellphone tracking around the country.

It’s against that backdrop that Securus is now moving ahead with a merger that could further consolidate a market already criticized as woefully consolidated. The company, which already claims to service more than 1.2 million inmates in North America, has announced its intention to acquire ICSolutions, a smaller competitor in the industry. While exact market figures are difficult to come by, and Securus has pointed to a handful of smaller businesses that offer similar services, inmate advocates argue that the merger will allow two companies to effectively dominate the market. The only thing standing in the way is the FCC.

Securus claims to service more than 1.2 million inmates in North America

The merger requires approval from the agency, and the battle has been playing out in dueling regulatory filings. The Prison Policy Initiative, a nonprofit organization that has fought against onerous prison phone prices for years, has argued that scandal-plagued Securus lacks the requisite “character” requirements for approval, and should be blocked on those grounds. Among other issues, legal director Aleks Kajstura says, the company has been accused by advocates and FCC commissioners of changing the name of a fee to skirt a ban by the agency, and by the FCC of lying to the agency itself. “I feel like that’s a pretty low bar to cross that Securus has failed at,” Kajstura says. (A Securus spokesperson said the company “does not believe it committed any wrongdoing” and entered into the FCC agreement to “expedite” the approval without admitting liability.)

The organization has said consolidation could mean more than 70 or 80 percent of calling services will be operated by two companies, Securus and GTL, the latter of which has already grown by acquiring competitors. With that much market share, they argue, the companies will be able to further tighten their hold on the industry as facilities and customers are forced to agree to whatever costs and terms the companies might demand.

Accused of lying to the FCC

Securus has strongly contested the figures, and in filings, it questioned the organizations’ methodologies, which rely on sparse publicly available records. But Securus, the Prison Policy Initiative points out, has not released its own figures. “They didn’t really put out a number of their own, which makes me think however they calculate, it’s not any better,” Kajstura says.

“Securus is continually working to provide the highest-quality services as affordably as possible, connecting individuals and keeping communities safe,” a spokesperson said in a statement. “Our industry is highly competitive, with over 40 operators vying for contracts — which has driven consumer call rates down by 37 percent over the last five years. Securus’ acquisition of another operator would not harm competition, but would instead allow us to reduce costs and pass on price reductions to consumers, while investing in public safety and security.”

Today, companies like Securus often bargain with prisons and jails for exclusive contracts, and they offer the facilities a cut of the revenue in exchange. Families, advocates say, bear the heaviest burden from those contracts, which can include price structures that benefit the facilities, as advocates say some calls can cost nearly $25 for 15 minutes. Under a new regime, the advocates argue, the companies will be able to dictate even more stringent terms that will further squeeze families of the incarcerated who already complain about the costs of keeping in touch with an incarcerated loved one. “Clearly, the market’s at the point where they’re doing pretty damn well what they please,” Kajstura says.

“Our industry is highly competitive”

Current FCC chairman Ajit Pai has not left a track record that bodes well for advocates. As a commissioner at the agency, before assuming the top role, Pai voted against a proposal to regulate the cost of inmate phone calls. The measure was approved, but after taking over, he declined to let the agency defend it in court where parts were successfully challenged by the phone companies. The decision was a severe blow to advocates who worked for years on the rules, and there is no sign of progress toward curbing costs under the current Republican-controlled FCC, which could make a decision on whether to approve the merger soon.

Pai’s FCC did impose a $1.7 million fine against the company for allegedly misleading the agency during a transfer of control proceeding. In a statement at the time, Pai described the incident as “a very serious matter” — but he moved to let the transaction continue. Then-commissioner Mignon Clyburn, dissenting on the decision, described Securus as “a company that has shown it is willing to operate on the bleeding edge of legality when it comes to this agency’s rules.” She described the FCC’s action as “less a slap on the wrist” than “a pat on the back.”

“Less a slap on the wrist” than “a pat on the back”

But the advocates have some allies. Massachusetts attorney general Maura Healey has also supported blocking the merger. In a filing with the FCC, Healey writes that “Securus is seeking to avoid any Massachusetts regulatory oversight of its rates and practices.” The merger would leave an effective duopoly in the state, she writes. Securus has argued against the ability of telecom authorities in the state to regulate prices. In an industry where competition is one of the few checks on the companies’ considerable leverage, the merger is causing anxiety.

“Following many years of exorbitant and unfair charges imposed on inmate calling services, it is abundantly clear that we need more competition and oversight from the FCC and the states, not less,” she writes.