from: Telecom Web [1]
Lobbyists Warm Up For Renewed Video-Franchise Battle
The telco-based Consumers for Cable Choice (C4CC) group has begun its lobbying campaign in preparation for the reconvening of the U.S. Congress, with a renewed call for federal legislation that will streamline video franchising and establish a national system.
As forces in the debate start to remuster in advance of the congressional calendar, C4CC in part focused its pressure on Pennsylvania's Republican Senators Rick Santorum and Arlen Specter, trying to get them to vote in favor communications-reform legislation - the Advanced Telecommunications and Opportunity Reform (ATOR) Act (newly titled H.R. 5252 - that includes the U.S franchise proposal (although neither of those politicians are on the key Senate committee that approved the bill in late June).
Stressing potential savings to Pennsylvania residents of $329 million that could result from competition against major cablecos, C4CC maintains the Senate could have enacted a national competition proviso in July before it adjourned for its August vacation. The group also suggested the measure could be voted by the full Senate as early as September; other sources, however, have indicated the vote may take longer to surface.
Nevertheless, Robert K. Johnson, president of the Indianapolis-based C4CC, told a community meeting at the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) National Education Service Center in Philadelphia that consumers "could really use a break" on video services in view of their rising expenses for utilities and other necessities. "We hope our senators keep this in mind when they return to work in September," he remarked.
At that same session, Dr. Gabriela Lemus, LULAC's director of policy and legislation, said her group supports cable-TV competition because it could open access to several new communications services in home, school and workplace settings. "We believe that, in a competitive environment, these services will flourish," she added.
Amid state developments and spot telco-municipal fights over video franchises, a few weeks ago the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) resurrected its campaign by pressing for the federal legislation as Congress approaches the end of its recess (Telecom Policy Report, Aug. 18). Its focus is on Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R- Tenn.) and Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
Pennsylvania, meanwhile, is among the states whose legislatures are considering statewide franchising bills backed by Verizon Communications and other large telecom carriers (Telecom Policy Report, Aug. 24), but the C4CC/LULAC session tended to focus on the national scene. Among other things, Johnson outlined the benefits of injecting competition into the cable business with savings estimates from the Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal and Economic Public Policy Studies, another telco ally that also sides with the carriers on the network-neutrality issue (Telecom Policy Report, July 23).
The Phoenix Center study says consumers across the country would save more than $7 billion if robust cable competition existed in the United States. In addition to monthly cost savings, Johnson claimed competition will do for the cable industry what it does for other markets: spur innovation and expand service to reach as many customers as possible, including rural residents and small business operators who have been ignored by "traditional, monopolistic cable companies."
The national video-franchising measure, however, is a multi-faceted hot spot. It has prompted calls for build-out/non-discrimination requirements, it has raised monopoly fears of competitors; it has raised concerns over consumer protection/complaint procedures; and it has worried lower-echelon governments over local, county and state jurisdictional issues, bypassing state wide franchise legislation and rights-of-way management authority.