When Edward Whitacre was plotting last year to take over AT&T, the rumour in Washington was that the chief executive of what was then still called SBC had an audacious plan: his Texas telecoms company would also make a bid for BellSouth, in effect reversing the 1980s break-up of Ma Bell.
Mr Whitacre was talked out of the plan, in part because it was unclear how regulators at the Federal Communications Commission and antitrust officials at the Department of Justice would receive SBC's $16bn takeover of AT&T, let alone another acquisition.
But any lingering doubts about the Bush administration's view on telecoms mergers evaporated last November, when both the FCC and DOJ approved the joining of SBC and AT&T, and Verizon's acquisition of MCI without any onerous conditions.
For analysts and antitrust attorneys, approval of the deals by FCC chairman Kevin Martin underscored how vastly the competitive landscape in the communications sector has changed since 1997, when then FCC chairman Reed Hundt said a reconfiguration of Ma Bell was "unthinkable".
The emergence of wireless and voice over internet services over the past few years means traditional industry lines have blurred, they say, and that telecoms companies and other groups have successfully argued that the build-up of bigger communications networks to fuel the economy requires more investment – and biggercoffers.
Andrew Lipman, an attorney with Bingham McCutchen in Washington, says, from AT&T's perspective, the stars in Washington are aligned for a takeover of BellSouth, given Republican domination of the Congress and White House.
"The companies can probably expect similar conditions as the previous mergers," Mr Lipman says, noting it would most likely take a year for AT&T's takeover of BellSouth to receive regulatory approval.
Mr Whitacre faces one significant advantage in his bid to take over BellSouth that he did not have last year: a Republican majority at the FCC.
The nomination of Robert McDowell, a former telecoms lobbyist, at the FCC last month will give Mr Martin the majority of votes he needs at the commission to approve the merger with even fewer conditions than last year.
At the time, the FCC chairman said he did not believe that even the few conditions that were set on AT&T and Verizon were necessary, and that the mergers would provide incentives for the companies to invest in broadband infrastructure.
Although Mr McDowell technically opposed SBC's takeover of AT&T last year, when he served as general counsel of the Competitive Telecommunications Association, which represents alternative telecoms carriers, two antitrust attorneys yesterday said Mr McDowell would most likely seek to distance himself from his former industry ties and support the deals.
One Washington regulatory attorney says the transaction is unlikely to face much opposition from other industry lobbyists, even if some groups, such as the cable industry, are unhappy with the merger.
Although speculation on Wall Street is rife that the deal would trigger a take-over bid by Verizon of Qwest, two attorneys yesterday said AT&T's move did not suggest another deal by Verizon was inevitable.
Instead, the deal could compel companies across the communications sector, including the satellite companies, to rethink their strategies and pursue mergers to compete against the resurrected telecoms behemoth: Ma Bell.