[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 1 (Wednesday, January 4, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E28]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page E28]]
            ANTITRUST AND COMMUNICATIONS REFORM ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                         HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY

                            of massachusetts

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, January 4, 1995

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as an original cosponsor of 
legislation introduced today which proposes to update our Nation's 
communications laws for the information age.
  Introduced by my colleague John Dingell, this legislation embodies 
measures--H.R. 3626 and H.R. 3636--which were approved in overwhelming 
fashion by the House in the previous Congress. Together, these bills 
represented the Nation's roadmap for the information superhighway. I 
want to commend my distinguished colleague, Mr. Dingell, for quickly 
bringing these issues to the attention of the House by introducing this 
legislation on the opening day of the 104th Congress.
  Although approved by impressive margins in the House, the Senate was 
unable to complete work on a similar measure due to a number of 
factors, including the lack of sufficient days remaining in the 
legislative calendar.
  Titles III, IV, V, and VI of the bill introduced today consist of the 
language of H.R. 3636, which I introduced in the 103d Congress with 
Representative Jack Fields. Working closely in bipartisan fashion with 
our other subcommittee colleagues, we were able to propose radical 
changes and needed reforms to our Nation's communications laws. This 
bill passed the House by a vote of 423 to 4 last year.
  It is my hope to again work closely with now-Chairman Fields and 
other committee members, in a nonpartisan way, to repeat our 
legislative success in the new Congress.
  The purpose of this legislation is to help consumers by promoting a 
national communications and information infrastructure. This 
legislation seeks to accomplish that goal by encouraging the deployment 
of advanced communications services and technologies through 
competition, by safeguarding ratepayers and competitors from potential 
anticompetitive abuses, by preserving and enhancing universal service, 
and by addressing longstanding legal and regulatory issues posed by the 
Modification of Final Judgment [MFJ], which broke up Ma Bell a decade 
ago.
  The bill will preserve and enhance the goal of providing to all 
Americans high-quality phone service at just and reasonable rates. This 
goal of universal service is one of the proudest achievements of our 
Nation during the 20th century, and this legislation will ensure it 
endures beyond the year 2000.
  Second, the legislation will promote and accelerate competition to 
the cable television industry by permitting telephone companies to 
compete in offering video programming. Specifically, the bill would 
rescind the statutory ban on telephone company ownership and delivery 
of video programming. Telephone companies would be permitted, through a 
separate subsidiary, to provide video programming to their subscribers 
so long as they establish an open system to permit others to use their 
video platforms. But they must enter the business the old fashioned 
way: by building a new system and not just through buying up an 
existing system.
  In addition, the legislation will promote competition in the local 
telephone market. This market is one of the last monopoly markets in 
the entire telecommunications universe. We all have witnessed how the 
long distance market and the telecommunications equipment market has 
benefited tremendously from competition. Just 10 years ago, you had one 
choice in long distance--AT&T--and one choice for a phone--black rotary 
dialed.
  Through Federal policies, hundreds of equipment makers and long 
distance companies now exist, providing rigorous competition. We can 
see those same benefits in the local telephone market, and thereby 
benefit consumers by giving them more choice at lower prices.
  Moreover, the legislation addresses issues related to the breakup of 
AT&T. The bill lays the foundation to resolve issues with respect to 
the line of business restrictions placed upon the Bell operating 
companies at the time of the breakup. It sets the stage for determining 
how and when a Bell company may participate in the long distance 
marketplace.
  In addition, this legislation stipulates the terms and conditions for 
Bell company participation in the information services, alarm, and 
equipment manufacturing markets. This legislation will effectively take 
these issues out of the courts and will provide a blueprint to the 
Federal Communications Commission, the Department of Justice, and State 
regulators as to how to move the industry toward greater competition 
while protecting consumers and competitors from the potential for 
monopoly abuses. This bill will also provide a modicum of certainty to 
participants in the marketplace, allowing CEO's, investors, and 
entrepreneurs to effectively plan for the future.
  Again, I want to commend Mr. Dingell for introducing this 
legislation. I look forward to working with him, Mr. Fields, Mr. 
Bliley, and other committee colleagues, on legislation to overhaul the 
1934 Communications Act for the 1990's.


                          ____________________