[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 98 (Thursday, June 15, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8417-S8419]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


         TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPETI- TION AND DEREGULATION ACT

  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the pending 
business.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 652) to provide for a procompetitive, 
     deregulatory national policy framework designed to accelerate 
     rapidly private sector deployment of advanced 
     telecommunications and information technologies and services 
     to all Americans by opening all telecommunications markets to 
     competition, and for other purposes.

  The Senate resumed consideration of the bill.

       Pending:
       Hollings (for Breaux) amendment No. 1299, to require that 
     at least 80 percent of vessels required to implement the 
     Global Maritime Distress and Safety System have the equipment 
     installed and operating in good working condition.
       Pressler (for McCain) amendment No. 1285, to means test the 
     eligibility of the community users.
       Simon modified amendment No. 1283, to revise the authority 
     relating to Federal Communications Commission rules on radio 
     ownership.
       Heflin amendment No. 1367, to provide for a local exchange 
     carrier to acquire cable systems.
       Pressler (for Dole) amendment No. 1341, to strike the 
     volume discounts provisions.
       Warner modified amendment No. 1325, to require additional 
     rules as a precondition to the authority for the Bell 
     operating companies to engage in research and design 
     activities relating to manufacturing.
       Lieberman amendment No. 1298, to establish a determination 
     of reasonableness of cable rates.
       Rockefeller amendment No. 1292, to eliminate any possible 
     jurisdictional question arising from universal service 
     references in the health care providers for rural areas 
     provision.
       Stevens-Inouye amendment No. 1303, to ensure that resale of 
     local services and functions is offered at an appropriate 
     price for providing such services.


                           amendment no. 1285

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Gregg). The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I wish to take a few minutes to discuss 
the amendment No. 1285 that I have offered on behalf of Senators Snowe, 
Rockefeller, Exon, Kerrey, Craig, and myself. [[Page S8418]] 
  Mr. President, it is my understanding that one-half hour has been 
reserved for debate on this amendment. Is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I intend to just use a few minutes and 
then reserve the remainder of that time for any of the Senators who 
wish to speak on the amendment any time between now and 12:15, if that 
is agreeable to the manager.
  Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, the amendment would effectively means test the 
community users provision in this bill. The amendment states that no 
for-profit business, school with an endowment of $50 million or more, 
or library that is not eligible for participation in the State-based 
plan qualifying for library services and Construction Act title III 
funds will receive preferential rates of treatment.
  Mr. President, as the part of the bill that came to the floor which 
was added as an amendment in committee, as it states now, any school, 
library, or hospital would be eligible for preferential rates or 
treatment.
  I understand the intent of that amendment. It has been made very 
clear and was again made clear when I proposed an amendment to remove 
that provision of the bill entirely.
  However, I am very pleased that Senators Snowe, Rockefeller, Exon, 
Kerrey, and others are in support of this amendment especially since 
Senators Snowe and Rockefeller are the prime sponsors of that amendment 
that was put into the bill in committee.
  This amendment would ensure that those who most need it, a rural 
health clinic or small school in any part of America including West 
Virginia, receive the most help. If this amendment is adopted, every 
public and nonprofit grade and secondary school in this country will 
receive preferential rates, every public library will receive 
preferential rates, and every nonprofit community health clinic will 
receive preferential rates. But this amendment will prevent some of the 
wealthiest in this country from unduly benefiting at the same time.
  As I mentioned earlier, I offered an amendment that would have 
eliminated the Snowe-Rockefeller provisions. I believe it is 
unnecessary for us to federalize this role of the States. I am 
disappointed that the Senate disagrees. I pointed out that in nearly 
all of the 50 States in America, the States have acted to provide some 
kind of help for schools, libraries, and health care providers in 
various ways, each of these States tailoring specific programs to 
specific needs in those States. And again I question seriously that we 
in the Senate can tailor programs that fit as diverse a nation as we 
have today.
  I listened to my colleagues from West Virginia, Nebraska, and Maine 
very closely. While they commented extensively on the need to ensure 
that we do not have technology haves and have-nots, surely they would 
agree we should not subsidize those who can well afford 
telecommunications services. My friend from Nebraska, Senator Kerrey, 
specifically expressed his cogent argument on the need to help the 
poorest and most in need in our country. I believe this amendment 
addresses the issues raised by my friend, and I am pleased to offer 
this amendment with the support of the Senator from Nebraska.
  Mr. President, I agree we must do what we can to prevent that from 
occurring. I believe that the free market will accomplish that goal. I 
also believe that vouchers will end up someday being the method by 
which we best address these problems of people who cannot afford basic 
telecommunications services. But at this time it is clear that neither 
the Senate nor the country is prepared for that.
  I was interested in the opposition to the vouchers amendment that I 
put forward. If there was ever ample testimony to the clout of the 
special interests that are involved in this issue, it was the size of 
the defeat of that amendment--not because I believe it was a perfect 
amendment but there is no doubt in my mind that every player in this 
very complex issue, whether it be AT&T, the Bell telephone companies, 
the manufacturers, every other entity involved was opposed to this 
voucher idea, which has been supported by the Heritage Foundation, the 
Cato Institute, every objective observer of this situation that does 
not have any monetary involvement.
  However, we received 18 votes, and if there was ever any testimony 
needed to the influence of the special interests in shaping this 
legislation, I believe when historians look at 18 votes, which was the 
purest and simplest way to provide the poor and the needy in this 
country with the ability to acquire telephone and telecommunications 
services, that was ample and compelling evidence and why I believe, Mr. 
President, that this bill, despite the great efforts of our 
distinguished chairman, who has done a magnificent job in shepherding 
this legislation this last nearly 2 weeks through the Senate, still has 
a lot of hurdles to overcome because of the inordinate influence of the 
special interests on this bill as opposed, very frankly, to the 
interests of the American public, which is not represented very well in 
this debate nor in the issues before the Senate.
  Back to the amendment, Mr. President, the provisions in this bill 
would enable some of the wealthiest in our country to benefit. Rural 
hospitals will receive benefits. Certainly some rural hospitals need 
help.
 But there are rural hospitals operated by large parent companies that 
make hundreds of millions of dollars. There is no reason to subsidize 
these corporations.

  Although the managers' amendment adopted allows the FCC to evaluate 
the subsidy scheme according to means, there is still a necessity to 
means test the provision. First, the FCC is going to pass regulations 
that treat all fairly and do not discriminate or which have a disparate 
impact. Such regulations benefit rich and poor equally. The amendment 
solves that problem.
  Harvard University operates a library. The university also currently 
has a $6 billion endowment. Should the American people, many who do not 
have the resources of Harvard University, be forced to subsidize the 
school library's telecommunications services? I do not think so.
  Do we want the well-to-do Humana Hospital Corp. which operates some 
rural hospitals to have a Government-sanctioned telephone discount? No, 
but we do want the small rural clinic to receive help. This amendment 
accomplishes that goal.
  If the Congress is going to endorse a Federal role in ensuring 
technology to be available to all, then let us tailor it so we are 
helping those who need our help. It is a balanced, fair amendment. I 
have confidence in its adoption. I am greatly appreciative that 
Senators Snowe, Rockefeller, and Kerrey in particular are in support of 
this amendment.
  Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. I believe that 
Senators Snowe, Rockefeller, and Kerrey have expressed interest in 
speaking on this amendment. I ask the manager if he will allow them my 
time to do so when they come to the floor to speak.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise in support as a cosponsor of Senator 
McCain's amendment to clarify how universal service discounts to 
schools, libraries, and rural hospitals under section 310 of the 
telecommunications bill should be targeted.
  As I noted last week in my remarks, I support targeting of discounts. 
For example, elementary and secondary schools with large endowments 
simply do not have the same need as public schools for discounts in 
order to assure affordable access to telecommunications services. In my 
view, the language in the bill gave the FCC, the States, and the Joint 
Board some flexibility to target discounts. Specifically, the language 
guaranteed schools and libraries an affordable rate, which implicitly 
takes into account both the price of the service and the ability of an 
entity to pay.
  I appreciate the time and effort Senator McCain has invested in 
working with the sponsors of section 310 to build upon the 
affordability concept, to develop a solid, responsible test of when 
schools, libraries, and rural hospitals should receive discounts in 
order [[Page S8419]] to promote the goal of affordable access to 
telecommunications services.
  Under the McCain amendment, public elementary and secondary schools 
would be eligible for discounts, as would private, nonprofit schools 
without large endowments. Libraries would be eligible for discounts if 
they participated in State-based plans under title III of the Library 
Services and Construction Act, which coordinate library development 
within the State. Non-profit rural health care providers would also be 
eligible for discounts.
  This amendment meets the twin goals which I am sure are supported by 
most Members of this Senate. First, it guarantees affordable access to 
telemedicine and educational telecommunications services for those key 
institutions in our society which need assistance in order to take full 
advantage of the information age. Second, by targeting the discounts, 
this amendment ensures that the universal service fund is used wisely 
and efficiently.
  Mr. President, the provision of the bill sponsored by myself, 
Senators Rockefeller, Exon, and Kerrey, is in my view one of the most 
important provisions of the bill. We know that competition will bring 
an array of improved services and exciting new services at a lower 
cost. Technology allows the transmission of information across 
traditional boundaries of time and space, dramatically changing the way 
that American school children learn, and the way that health care is 
provided. The Snowe-Rockefeller-Exon-Kerrey provision in the bill 
ensures that competition ultimately achieves this goal for all 
Americans, regardless of where they live. I realize that the 
distinguished Senator from Arizona believes that a deregulated market 
will take care of everyone, but I simply do not share that belief. 
Furthermore, the stakes are too great to leave affordable access to the 
marketplace. Again, I appreciate Senator McCain's willingness to work 
with myself and Senators Rockefeller, Exon, and Kerrey to clarify how 
discounts should be targeted, and I urge my colleagues to support the 
McCain amendment.
  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I note that we have limited time. I urge 
Senators to come early to make their statements, as we are on a time 
agreement at this point. Any Senator wishing to speak should come 
forth.
  Mr. INHOFE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be recognized 
as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________