roundtable: NEW--LISTNAMEHEREgt;Commerce Markup (fwd)
roundtable: NEW-->Commerce Markup (fwd)
NEW-->Commerce Markup (fwd)
Jeff Richards/ALLIANCE (richards@bell.com)
Fri, 26 May 1995 11:18:10 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 11:18:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jeff Richards/ALLIANCE <richards@bell.com>
Subject: NEW-->Commerce Markup (fwd)
To: bell@bell.com, communet@uvmvm.uvm.edu, roundtable@cni.org,
Message-Id: <Pine.3.85.9505261109.J12944-0100000@bell.com>
The following detailed news report on Thursday's Commerce Committee markup
is provided with permission of the publisher, Chris Valmassi, Washington
Telecom Report.
For subscription or other information about the Internet-distributed
publication, write to <wtn@wtn.com>. For questions about <bell.com>,
contact <info@bell.com>.
Jeff Richards................................................
The Alliance for Competitive Communications &
Pacific Telesis Group Internet: richards@bell.com
<bell.com> and <http://bell.com>
<listserver@bell.com> SUBSCRIBE BELL YOUR_LAST YOUR_FIRSTNAME
+1 202 973-5307 voice 1133-21st NW #700
+1 202 973-5351 TDD Washington DC 20036-3390
+1 202 973-5328 fax +1 800 SKY-PAGE pin 8550304
+1 202 383-6445 2nd office
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 00:07:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Chris Valmassei <wtn@wtn.com>
To: wtn@wtn.com
Subject: Commerce Markup
WASHINGTON TELECOM NEWSWIRE ...
________________________________________________________________
May 25, 1995
BELLS UNHAPPY, L.D. COMPANIES HAPPY,
AS HOUSE COMMITTEE MARKS UP TELECOM BILL 35-8
After some horse-trading on key issues, the Commerce Committee
today finished two days of markup of H.R. 1555, "The Communications
Act of 1995" by a vote of 35-8.
Dissenting on the final vote was ranking minority
Telecommunications Subcommittee member Ed Markey (D-MA), who fought
passionately but unsuccessfully to change the cable and media
ownership provisions in the bill.
Joining Markey in voting against the legislation were Reps. John
Bryant (D-TX), Gerry Studds (D-MA), Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and Ron
Klink (D-PA).
Commerce Committee Chairman Thomas Bliley (R-VA) predicted a
lengthy floor debate on the bill in July. He said he hoped deals
struck prior to markup will hold through floor action, but "you
never know."
It was apparent from reaction statements from key players that the
Bells are not happy with the legislation and will continue to fight
to remove some of the restrictions on their operations.
"Requiring a head start for our competitors to build their local
networks and offer service to both business and residential
[customers] before we can enter their market puts the competitors
in control of our business decisions and would let them game the
system and cream skim our best customers," said Gary McBee,
chairman of the Alliance for Competitive Communications, the
Bells' lobbying arm.
The long distance companies, by contrast, sounded pleased with the
bill.
"We are encouraged to see that the bill would require facilities-
based competition in both the residential and commercial markets
before the regional Bell companies could enter other competitive
markets.... We are further encouraged that the Commerce Committee
recognized the importance of requiring the Bell companies to
provide long distance service through a separate subsidiary, at
least on an interim basis," said a statement by Sen. Howard Baker,
head of the Competitive Long Distance Coalition.
But the Bells may have an ally in their efforts to remove some of
these regulations in House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), who spoke
to reporters today.
Gingrich said he has seen H.R. 1555 and "is very much in favor of
deregulating telecommunications markets." But he would like an
even more deregulatory approach to opening these markets, he added.
Gingrich said he would recommend to House Majority Leader Richard
Armey (R-TX), who controls the floor schedule, that the bill be
called up as soon as possible.
Questioned about recent comments on the role of the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC), Gingrich said he favors drastic
downsizing of the agency to about 250 employees.
These comments were echoed by Jeff Eisenach of the Progress and
Freedom Foundation, a think tank currently preparing a report on
the FCC for legislators.
Eisenach, who was supposed to submit the report on May 15, said
he will propose scaling down the FCC over 18 to 36 months beginning
with the next authorization cycle. The group has a news
conference scheduled for Tuesday to discuss its proposal to
eliminate the agency.
Asked how the FCC could handle the demands placed on it by the
legislation with fewer employees, Eisenach said, "We're not talking
about eliminating the FCC, just replacing it with a leaner
organization that establishes a broad framework and direction
(instead of getting involved in details.)"
But Bliley was non-committal on FCC downsizing. "We'll look at it,"
he said. "Right now, we're running another race, and we've got a
long way to go."
Bliley sponsored the key compromise provision on early Bell entry
into long distance. It was one of eight amendments to the bill
adopted today, in addition to the nine passed yesterday.
Bliley's en bloc amendment would allow a Bell company to apply for
interim authority to provide long distance as soon as it has met
the bill's checklist requirements and has a facilities-based
competitor offering service that is "comparable in price, features
and scope."
H.R. 1555, as drafted, would mandate a minimum 21-month delay
before the Bells could apply to enter long distance.
Bliley said the amendment would not mean a facilities-based
competitor would have to duplicate all Bell service offerings. "It
does mean...that a new competitor that offers telephone service
only in one office building with a few luxury apartments has not
met the standard," Bliley said.
The amendment also would require the Bell company to offer resale
of local phone service wherever it applies for interim authority.
Six months after the FCC has put in place its final rules on
opening the local loop, the interim authority would sunset and
the Bells would have to comply with all regulations established.
As a concession to the Bells, the Bliley compromise also would
require state regulators to keep long distance companies out of
the intraLATA long distance market until the Bells are allowed
into interLATA long distance. The amendment also would freeze
Bell out-of-region offerings until a Bell company is authorized
to provide in-region long distance.
"In other words, the...markets should open simultaneously," Bliley
said.
Rep. Scott Klug (R-WI) offered an amendment to Bliley's amendment
that would have exempted states that have already authorized
intraLATA competition or that initiate a proceeding on it prior to
the bill's enactment. This provision was defeated by voice vote,
with only Klug supporting it.
Rep. Billy Tauzin (D-LA) identified a technical flaw in the
amendment's language. Tauzin pointed out that, as written, the
amendment would prevent the Bells from ever offering out-of-
region long distance. Bliley agreed that was not his intention
and promised to fix the language before floor action.
The Bliley amendment was adopted by a unanimous voice vote.
The Bells also were hit with additional restrictions on their
long distance activities in an amendment offered by Bryant.
He offered a revised version of the amendment defeated yesterday
that would require the Bells to offer long distance through a
separate subsidiary.
Rep. Peter Deutsch (D-FL) tried to get the amendment withdrawn on
a point of order but, after a vocal debate, Bliley ruled against
him.
Today's successful Bryant amendment would sunset the separate
subsidiary requirement after three years, instead of the five
years proposed yesterday. And it would eliminate a requirement
that the Bells could not engage in joint marketing of local and
long distance service.
After assurances that the amendment included a "hard" sunset that
could not be delayed by the FCC at the end of three years, the
committee adopted the amendment by a roll call vote of 29-15.
Another controversial amendment dealing with media ownership was
passed 34-13 after two attempts by Markey to soften it.
This amendment, offered by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), would repeal
national and local radio ownership limits. It also would increase
the ceiling on TV station ownership. Current restrictions prohibit
one company from owning stations that reach more than 25 percent of
the national audience. Stearns' amendment would increase that
audience reach limit to 35 percent upon enactment and to 50 percent
one year later.
The amendment also would require the FCC to initiate a study on
competition in the TV marketplace within three years, would repeal
cross-ownership rules and would allow entities to own different
combinations of mass media.
In a key compromise that addresses concerns expressed at last
week's subcommittee markup by ranking minority member John Dingell
(D-MI), the amendment also says the FCC will not approve any
acquisition that would result in all outlets in a given market
being owned by two or less owners.
Other amendments adopted today include:
-- One by Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA) that would require applicants
for entry to the local exchange to negotiate in good faith, just
as the Bells are required to do.
-- One by Markey that would ensure that the FCC has the resources
necessary to discharge its responsibilities under the legislation.
Fields said he would support the amendment as long as there was
room to debate at a later date what the FCC required.
-- One by Rep. Anna Eschoo (D-CA) that would ensure that the FCC
sets only narrow standards that mandate a minimum degree of common
design and operation when implementing rules determining
compatibility of telecommunications devices.
-- One by Rep. Mike Oxley (R-OH) that would lift foreign ownership
restrictions on common carriers as other countries drop their
barriers. The amendment automatically would eliminate restrictions
on individuals whose native country has a trade agreement with the
U.S. on telecommunications. For other countries, the FCC still
would be able to lift restrictions if they deem it in the public
interest. The FCC would be directed to consider opportunities for
Americans in the applicant's home market and the President's
guidance regarding national security implications.
Oxley said the amendment also would clarify that the 25 percent
figure in the Communications Act is not an absolute cap on foreign
ownership. Rather, Oxley said, it is a level above which the FCC
must apply the public interest test.
-- One by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) that would establish an expedited
complaint process for small telecommunications businesses that feel
they have been damaged by another communications company.
Perhaps the most contentious issue was the failed amendment offered
by Markey on cable company deregulation.
Markey's amendment would have placed severe limitations on which
cable companies were freed immediately from regulation. H.R.
1555, as drafted, would deregulate small cable systems, affecting
30 percent of all cable subscribers, according to Markey.
By redefining what constitutes a small cable company, Markey's
amendment would have reduced the number of subscribers affected to
8.5 percent.
"The telephone company isn't coming to your hometown this year or
next year or the next. Consumers are being given the promise of
competition but not the reality," Markey said.
But the Republicans said they felt that the amendment would upset
the competitive balance struck in the bill and "keep in place a
failed regulatory system," said Rep. Dan Schaefer (R-CO).
The amendment was defeated on a roll call vote 32-14.
Other amendments defeated were:
-- Another one by Markey that would have required cable companies
to have a uniform rate structure so that they could not engage in
predatory pricing to deter competition. Opponents said a
competitive market will control pricing.
-- One by Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY) that would have prohibited
the Bell companies from connecting alarm monitoring centers across
LATAs.
-- One by Klink that would have required cable companies to carry
low-power TV stations.
Among the amendments withdrawn were:
-- One by Barton that would have required cellular carriers to
negotiate in good faith to interconnect with resellers and would
have allowed the cellular carrier to charge a rate that was
economically viable and adequate to recover costs.
-- One by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) that would have ensured the right
of local governments to manage and collect fees for their public
rights-of-way. This amendment mirrors one made to the Senate
telecommunications legislation offered by Sen. Kay Hutchison
(R-TX).
-- One by Rep. Michael Crapo (R-ID) that would have imposed certain
requirements on cable companies regarding video platforms.
The last amendment of the day, facetiously offered by Studds,
would have prevented people from standing in line for others to
attend telecommunications hearings. Although it was ruled non-
germane and withdrawn, Bliley commented that he was afraid he
would have to take action on this problem as a result of
Wednesday's Washington Post story, which pointed out how early
line-waiters gathered before the markup.
# # #
(Transmitted at 11:55 p.m. ET) 214-95
_________________________________________________________________
For more information, contact Washington Telecom Newswire:
Chris Valmassei
Washington Telecom Newswire | Internet: wtn@wtn.com
![[CNI Home Page]](/Images/home.gif)