Illustration by Cody Angell

If the Enron scandal is too distant and convoluted for your attention, you need not look any further than your local telephone service provider to find a story packed with fraud, corruption and criminal intrigue.

The most recent chapter unfolds as Qwest moves ahead with its plans to share customer information within its "family of companies" and other companies if it is "commercially reasonable to do so."

Arizona Attorney General Janet Napolitano has criticized Qwest's statement of intent, noting that sharing information with outside companies is "directly contrary to (Qwest's) existing privacy policy."

In response, Qwest has said it will not sell customer information to other firms. But then, Qwest does not have a track record that inspires trust.

By law, the company must alert subscribers that it plans to share customer information such as service plans, calling and billing records. Accordingly, subscribers can keep their information private by calling the company (1-877-628-3732) or visiting the company website www.qwest.com/cpni.

Qwest did notify its customers of the plan weeks ago. Don't you remember? The notice came in your bill buried within a small pamphlet that looked like an advertisement. Although it conformed to legal standards, the notification was not designed to ensure that every customer was duly informed. For example, the notice was initially sent only in English, which neglected Qwest's thousands of Spanish-speaking consumers.

After the Arizona Republic ran a story about Qwest's intentions, the company was inundated with more phone calls than it could handle. Qwest didn't intend for most of its customers to find out - the company profits from subscriber ignorance.

This is not the first time Qwest has taken advantage of its customers. The California Public Utilities Commission started investigating Qwest two years ago after receiving more than 40,000 complaints against the company. Customers claimed that Qwest switched them from one long service provider to another without their approval (known as slamming) and illegally billed them for unrequested services (known as cramming). The majority of complaints came from customers who speak Asian languages or Spanish.

In Oregon last year, the Department of Justice and the Public Utility Commissioner's office launched an investigation into Qwest's alleged illegal billing practices. Again, the elderly and non-English-speaking customers filed a high percentage of the complaints.

Qwest has been sued for slamming and cramming in several other states, including Arizona and has been accused by the Federal Communications Commission of violating the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The company has even been charged with violating the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

It seems like Qwest is either constantly under investigation or playing the defendant in class action suits. After spending millions of dollars settling lawsuits and paying fines, Qwest is still at it. How is it that a company can behave so fraudulently and maintain its more than 25 million customers?

Jim Smith, Qwest's executive vice president of consumer markets, asserted that if Qwest "irritated" its customers, the company would lose them in an "increasingly competitive marketplace." Who is he fooling? Many customers, while thoroughly irritated - nay, enraged - with the company have no other choice than Qwest.

In fact, Qwest has a monopoly over local telephone service in several Western states. As a legal monopoly, Qwest is regulated by the Arizona Corporation Commission, which maintains the company's prices and oversees its practices. Because of this regulation, there remains a possibility that, one day, another telephone company may move in to compete.

Of course, Qwest doesn't want any competition, so it tried to change the regulations in 2000 with Proposition 108, which was written by Qwest attorneys and funded almost entirely by the company.

Thankfully, 80 percent of Arizona voters were too wise to assist Qwest in solidifying its monopoly and the proposition was voted down. But voters should expect to see further devious attempts by Qwest to squelch competition in the future.

Unfortunately, voters cannot elect morality to rule over Qwest's business practices. Thus, Qwest will continue to perform in a way that is most profitable for the company and least beneficial for its customers.

But we, the reluctant customers of Qwest, are not completely helpless. We must scrutinize our phone bills and identify wrongful charges. We must call the company and wait on hold for days at a time to correct our bills - then call back and wait even longer when no corrections are made.

We must keep a careful eye on new legislation. We must prohibit the company from sharing our private information. We need to cancel any services we neither want nor use but that we were sold.

And, as the one meager alternative to Qwest's local telephone service, we can use only wireless services (although I cannot recommend it).

So I guess we have a choice after all: Use cell phones and risk brain cancer, or deal with Qwest.

It's a harder decision than it should be.