roundtable: Internet Users: STOP THE TELECOM BILL!
roundtable: Internet Users: STOP THE TELECOM BILL!
Internet Users: STOP THE TELECOM BILL!
Anthony E. Wright (aewright@cme.org)
Mon, 31 Jul 1995 23:22:09 -0400
Message-Id: <v02120d00ac434e02a28d@[205.197.91.5]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 1995 23:22:09 -0400
To: roundtable@cni.org
From: aewright@cme.org (Anthony E. Wright)
Subject: Internet Users: STOP THE TELECOM BILL!
Update 1.0 * 7/31/95
Please repost where appropriate until 8/4/95
From: Center for Media Education, Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility, Consumer Federation of America, Media Access Project,
People for the American Way Action Fund, Taxpayer Assets Project/Consumer
Project on Technology.
A PLEA TO ALL INTERNET USERS:
Action Alert: Stop the Telecommunications Bill!
-----------------------------------------------
THE SCOOP
A coalition of public interest groups ask the Internet community to urge
their Congressional Representatives to vote against "The Communications
Act of 1995," H.R. 1555.
Please consider writing, calling, or faxing your representative about this
anti-competitive, anti-consumer, anti-Internet legislation. For details
and more information, see the bottom of this post.
WHAT IS HAPPENING?
A major rewrite of the communications laws of this nation, the first since
1934, is scheduled to be considered by the full House of Representatives
this week.
WHO WILL BE AFFECTED?
This bill will have a profound impact on every citizen, affecting our
nation's economy, culture, and democracy. Individuals will see the
repercussion in their cable, phone and online service rates, in what
media choices they will and will not have, and in the very shape of the
"information highway."
Yet the legislation has been crafted out of public view, through the
lobbying efforts of telephone, cable, broadcast, newspaper, publishing,
online services, consumer electronic, entertainment and other companies.
In fact, Congress received over $40 million in the last ten years in
campaign contribution from these companies, according to a recent Common
Cause study.
WHY IS THIS ALERT TARGETING INTERNET USERS?
Specific provisions will directly affect the Internet. Users have been
actively opposing one Senate provision to ban all "indecent" communications
on computer networks. Given the overwhelming Senate support for that
measure, there is substantial risk that any version of the
telecommunications bill will contain content restrictions of some sort.
Not only will any version of this legislation probably regulate content on
the Internet, it will certainly eliminate many important economic
safeguards against market power and abuse. The very competitive market that
exists for Internet service providers should be emulated for phone and
cable companies. Yet the legislation encourages greater monopoly control
over all communications services.
Finally, Internet users have a familiarity with these new communications
technologies which is sorely lacking in Congress. Rather than embracing the
individualistic and open character of the Internet, the legislation
encourages the old model of media monopolies. Internet users best know the
potential of the new media system, and what would be lost.
WHY SHOULD I BE CONCERNED?
The telecommunications bills in Congress--H.R. 1555 in the House of
Representatives, and S. 652 in the Senate--create a flawed foundation for
the future of the "information highway" and the 21st century media
environment. The legislation would eliminate long-standing safeguards
regarding accessibility, quality and affordability of communications
services.
Of specific concern:
* CIVIL LIBERTIES VIOLATIONS
Current and proposed provisions of these bills impose
government regulations of the content of electronic
communication, in a way which many civil liberties
groups believe violate the First Amendment.
One provision, the "Communications Decency Act"
sponsored by Senators Exon and Coats, would simply ban
all "indecent" communications on the Internet and other
computer networks, without recognizing the ability of
technology to implement parental controls. Even some who
think that prohibitions are necessary believe the
"indecent" standard is undefinable and unconstitutional.
The bills also contain no protections to prevent
communications corporations from abusing basic civil
rights like privacy. In fact, the word "privacy" is
scarcely mentioned in any version of the bill.
* DETERRENCE OF OPEN ACCESS
The future of the country's media system can
fundamentally go in two directions. One direction is a
closed system like your cable service, where your cable
operator chooses what channels you can and cannot watch.
The other direction is "common carriage," like the
Internet, where you--regardless of who your Internet
service providers is--can access any other E-mail
account, gopher, or Web site.
The bills not only allow the new video delivery systems
of the future to follow the closed cable model, but
in fact contain perverse incentives against the open
Internet model.
* INFLATED RATES
Cable and phone rates will skyrocket, according to
consumer organizations, making communications and
information services more costly when the costs to the
provider are dropping sharply, and information services
are increasingly essential to the economic well-being of
individuals and the nation as a whole.
The legislation would repeal price controls on monopoly
cable television systems. These 1992 regulations are
believed to have already saved consumers nearly $3
billion. _Consumer Reports_ estimates that the Senate
bill, which deregulates the most popular services such
as CNN, A&E, Discovery, and MTV, "would increase cable
TV bills by up to 50% for those who now pay the national
average rate--a $7 hike on a $14 monthly bill... The
House version would allow still-higher increases...."
The 1992 Cable Act already deregulates rates when the
monopoly cable system faces significant competition.
This repeal would remove regulations prematurely,
creating an unregulated monopoly in virtually every
community in the country.
* LOST OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMPETITION
Increased competition will benefit consumers with lower
rates. In the bills, traditional barriers to competition
across markets are eliminated, but instead of promoting
competition, the bills invite the business entities
involved--telephone, cable, broadcast, and other
telecommunications giants--to combine forces.
Competitors are encouraged to merge. The best deal for
consumers is to have the two traditional monopolies that
have wires running into your home--your phone and cable
companies--to compete against each other. But in most of
the country, the two will be allowed to merge, stifling
the best hope for competition.
As a result, there may be ever fewer, ever more powerful
entities with resources so vast that it will be far more
difficult for competitors to enter their markets on the
scale necessary to provide multichannel video or other
telecommunications services.
* MORE CONCENTRATION OF OWNERSHIP OF MEDIA
The bills would eliminate many national and local
ownership limits and "cross-ownership" bans. Thus, one
company could own numerous broadcast television and
radio stations, and the newspaper, cable and telephone
businesses in a community. It could also own hundreds of
other stations across the country.
Control of media content and control over the means of
delivery will fall increasingly into fewer hands,
striking a serious blow to diversity and localism.
* LESS PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY
As the concentration of power in the media industry
accelerates, the media giants will become less
accountable to the public than they are now. Public
interest groups fear the bill retires the idea that
media corporations, as trustees of our communications
system, have any responsibility to the public.
Broadcasting entities, who use lucrative public airwaves
for free, would have their license renewal terms be
extended from five to ten years, and would have
increased protection from license challenge. These types
of provisions remove essential mechanisms to ensure
public accountability.
Also, at a time when many argue that power should be
shifted locally, the bills do the opposite. The
legislation mandates the types of regulation that states
must adopt regarding telecommunications, giving state
and community authorities little flexibility.
* INDUSTRY GIVEAWAY
Some have called this a "classic special interest bill,"
with each industry getting various perks in order for
their support. A policy called "spectrum flexibility"
would give current broadcasters additional public
spectrum--worth $11-70 billion--for free, without
anything in return.
* MISSING IN ACTION
While this bill lavishes industry with special
provisions, the public--including children and the
nonprofit community--get little in the deal: no public
interest quid pro quo. There is no equivalent to last
year's provision that ensured access for nonprofit
programmers and information providers.
The Snowe/Rockefeller amendment in the Senate bill to
help wire schools and libraries was severely weakened;
the House bill has no meaningful language to ensure
public institutions' access to the "information
highway."
WHAT CAN I DO?
Contact your Representative in Congress and urge them to vote against H.R. 1555.
Then contact the President and urge him to veto the bill.
HOW DO I CONTACT MY REPRESENTATIVE?
To call, dial the Capital Switchboard and ask for your Representative. If
you do not know who your representative is, the operator can tell you when
provided with your zip code. The phone number is:
(202)225-3121 (or 224-3121)
To write, send a letter to:
The Honorable (full name of your representative)
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
HOW DO I CONTACT THE PRESIDENT?
To call, dial the White House switchboard:
(202)456-1414
To write, send a letter to:
President Clinton
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500
You can also E-mail the president at president@whitehouse.gov
WHAT IS MOST EFFECTIVE?
As of this writing, the bill is scheduled to go to the floor of the House
of Representatives this week (August 1-4). While letters are considered the
most effective form of expressing your opinion, make sure they arrive
before the vote. Faxes and calls are generally considered more effective
than E-mail. Cite a reason for your opposition, including the concerns
listed above.
Your voice counts! Since this bill has been crafted through
inside-the-Beltway discussions and with virtually no media coverage,
legislators have gotten comparatively little grassroots input outside of
the affected industries. A few calls or letters on this issue will mean a
lot!
Contact your representative regardless of party affiliation. Both Democrats
and Republicans need to hear from the public, and each member will have
reasons for supporting and/or opposing the bill.
HOW CAN I GET UPDATES AND MORE INFORMATION?
The Center for Media Education has set up an automailer to distribute
frequent updates and additional information. Send an E-mail message to:
bill@cme.org
You will get a regularly updated report of the status of these
telecommunications bills, and instructions on what you can do to help
defeat it. The report will also include more detailed information about the
bills, including automailers, gophers and Web sites with analyses,
organizational statements, and copies of the bills. These alerts and
updates are also located on the ad-hoc Web site on the legislation:
http://www.access.digex.net/~cme/bill.html
WHO IS SPONSORING THIS ALERT?
Center for Media Education is a nonprofit public interest group focused on
communications policy issues, to promote the democratic potential of
electronic media.
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility is a national membership
organization of computer professionals advocating on behalf of the public
interest on technology policy.
The Consumer Federation of America is a nonprofit association of 240
pro-consumer groups, with a combined membership of 50 million, that was
founded in 1968 to advance the consumer interest through advocacy and
education.
Media Access Project is a nonprofit public interest law firm which
represents the public's First Amendment rights before the FCC and the
courts.
People for the American Way Action Fund is a 300,000 member constitutional
liberties organization dedicated to protecting the First Amendment rights
of all Americans in the media environment.
Taxpayer Assets Project and the Consumer Project on Technology are groups
founded by Ralph Nader concerned with public interest considerations in
telecommunications policy.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION
--
Anthony E. Wright aewright@cme.org
Coordinator, Future of Media Project Center for Media Education
![[CNI Home Page]](/Images/home.gif)