roundtable: Telecom Reform

roundtable: Telecom Reform

Telecom Reform

Faye M. Anderson (fmanders@CapAccess.org)
Thu, 2 Nov 1995 18:42:50 -0500 

Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 18:42:50 -0500
Message-Id: <199511022342.SAA28707@cap1.CapAccess.org>
From: fmanders@CapAccess.org (Faye M. Anderson)
To: roundtable@cni.org
Subject: Telecom Reform


Dear Colleague,

Attached for your information is the Council of 100's letter 
regarding H.R. 1555 and S. 652.  The letter was sent to all
Republican House and Senate conferees.

Please drop me a line if you have any questions or comments.

Faye M. Anderson
Executive Director
Council of 100
2025 "Eye" Street, N.W.
Suite 1122
Washington, DC  20006
(202) 775-5496 ~~ (202) 484-7029 fax
PO`!1a
October 27, 1995



Dear House-Senate Conferee:

As the House-Senate Conference Committee begins its deliberations to 
reconcile H.R. 1555 and S. 652, the Council of 100, a national network 
of African American Republicans, wants to share our concerns that 
certain provisions of the bills fall short of a "new paradigm" for 
legislative and regulatory reform, particularly with respect to their 
impact on deficit reduction, opportunities for new entrants, media 
concentration and accountability, and public school access to advanced 
telecommunications services.

SPECTRUM GIVEAWAY
As Congress calls for shared sacrifice to balance the budget, it strains 
credulity that the public interest will be served by giving a scarce 
public resource--digital broadcast spectrum--with an estimated value of 
between $11 and $70 billion to some of the country's most profitable 
corporations with no additional public interest obligations attached.  
This egregious form of corporate welfare will be used to subsidize 
broadcasters' transition from analog to digital transmission even as 
their competitors in the cable, video dialtone and direct broadcast 
industries are making the capital investment to digital technology.

The spectrum giveaway contravenes the spirit of the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1993, and gives rise to the "national scandal" 
about which former Federal Communications Commission General Counsel 
Henry Geller testified at a July 27th hearing of the Senate Commerce 
Committee.  Moreover, such a course of action ignores the clear message 
that voters sent last November:  no more sweetheart deals, no more 
business as usual.  

It's particularly ironic that legislation designed to level the playing 
field and promote competition includes provisions that shut out new 
entrants and confer upon the broadcast industry an unfair and unearned 
advantage over, among others, small businesses, and women- and minority-
owned businesses who just a few months ago paid hundreds of millions of 
dollars for licenses to provide interactive and personal communications 
services that broadcasters will be able to provide with no upfront 
payment to the U.S. Treasury in the name of "spectrum flexibility."

The advances in digital technology, the prohibitive cost of high 
definition television, no foreseeable consumer demand for "eye-popping" 
pictures, and the sale of the last American television manufacturer have 
rendered moot the rationale underlying the giveaway of broadcast spectrum.  
Accordingly, the Council of 100 urges the conferees to drop the giveaway 
of a second channel to broadcasters and to, instead, direct the Federal 
Communications Commission to auction the spectrum.  An auction will 
ensure that the American people will receive a fair return for the 
commercial exploitation of a scarce public resource, and that the 
spectrum will be assigned to those who value it the most, thereby, 
stimulating competition, innovation and economic growth.

MEDIA CONCENTRATION
The easing of national television ownership limits and the removal of 
radio ownership caps will place nearly insurmountable barriers to new 
entrants in the broadcast industry.  Capital formation is particularly 
challenging for small, minority- and women-owned businesses; 
concentration of media ownership will leave independent, minority and 
women broadcasters stranded on a major thoroughfare of the information 
superhighway.

While the communications revolution promises a diversity of programming 
choices, media concentration is antithetical to the diversity of voices 
and to the free flow of information that are the hallmarks of a robust 
democracy and an informed citizenry.  The broadcasting industry is 
unique from other industries; two-thirds of Americans get their news from 
television.  The spectacle of CNN refusing to air ads opposing H.R. 1555 
and S. 652 due to the corporate conflict of interest of its parent, 
Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., speaks volumes about the inherent 
danger of media concentration.

BROADCAST LICENSE TERMS
The extension of television and radio license terms to ten years 
will adversely impact the ability of citizens to hold accountable 
broadcasters who fail to meet their public interest obligations.  
According to a poll published in the New York Times last August, 
Americans have a starkly negative view of popular culture and blame 
television more than any other single factor for teenage sex and 
violence.  Children themselves report that television encourages them 
to take part in sexual activity too soon, to show disrespect for 
parents, to lie and to engage in aggressive behavior.

Congress's support for the v-chip and the campaign against gangsta rap 
are tacit acknowledgments that many broadcasters are not operating in 
the public interest.  The license renewal process empowers citizens 
with an effective tool by which to hold licensees accountable for the 
coarsening of popular culture and the debasing of traditional family 
values.

The legislation before the Committee provides a national framework in 
which to promote private investment.  While a coherent legislative and 
regulatory framework is long overdue, the 104th Congress should not 
rush to judgment.  Private sector interests and the public interest 
must be carefully balanced.  The Council of 100 believes that the 
legislation can and indeed must be modified to ensure that all 
Americans--megacorporations, big and small businesses, workers, 
educators, students and consumers--have a fair chance to participate 
and share in the benefits of the information age.

We look forward to meeting with you and your staff in the coming days 
to discuss our concerns.

Sincerely,

Milton Bins
Chairman


Faye M. Anderson
Executive Director

--
Faye M. Anderson
P.O. Box 65164
Washington, DC  20035-5164
(202) 775-5496 ~~ (202) 484-7029 fax

[CNI Home Page]