[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 11 (Friday, January 26, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S393]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             URGING SUPPORT FOR THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS BILL

  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I would like to report to the Members of 
the Senate the progress of the telecommunications bill and urge that 
all Members continue to show great interest. I also urge all citizens 
interested in this legislation to show vigilance and continue to 
support the bill and urge that it be passed.
  As Members of the Senate know, consideration of this bill has gone on 
for a long time and it is a bipartisan bill. It has attracted the 
support of many groups across the country. We now have the regional 
Bell companies supporting the bill and we have the long-distance 
companies supporting the bill. That is an unusual, rare moment in 
American history when the regional Bells and long-distance companies 
are temporarily at peace, so to speak.
  Indeed, the labor union, the Communications Workers of America [CWA], 
yesterday sent a letter to Senator Dole urging that the bill be passed. 
So this bill has gotten an unusual amount of support. The big cable 
companies and the small cable companies support it. The broadcasters 
support it, to the extent of what is in the bill now.
  I know there is a dispute over the spectrum area. What I am saying is 
that we have an historic opportunity to pass a bill. But if we hesitate 
very long, this whole thing will come unraveled. I am very worried 
about it coming unraveled. So I rise to ask for the continued vigilance 
and support of everybody across the country and of my fellow Senators.
  Let me say a word or two about the spectrum issue that has arisen. 
Our leader has, quite correctly, raised the issue of the spectrum. I 
would say this bill does not give the spectrum away as it is written. 
We believe strongly that there is some misunderstanding about what the 
bill says about the spectrum. Indeed, this Senator tried very hard to 
put the spectrum auction issue into the reconciliation bill, and later 
have it dealt with as a budgetary matter.
  The point before us is that we are going to have to have a broad 
spectrum bill. I like to call it a ``grand spectrum debate.'' I think 
the sale to MCI yesterday, its new bid of approximately $680 million 
for something that was scored by CBO at less than $100 million, shows 
the value that there is in the spectrum and the potential savings to 
taxpayers. We have to think about the taxpayers.
  It is not just the broadcasters who use the spectrum. The spectrum is 
also used by people with handheld radios, and by people doing radar 
photography. The military has a good deal of spectrum allocated to it, 
as does the CIA. We need to educate ourselves and the people of the 
country about the value of all this spectrum use and what the 
taxpayers' interest in it is.
  There has been very little, for example, on television shows 
discussing the spectrum, strangely enough. We have not had a feature on 
the spectrum and its value to the taxpayers on ``60 Minutes'' that I 
know of. Nor have we seen Ted Koppel doing a feature on the spectrum 
and how valuable it might be to the taxpayers.
  For some mysterious reason, there have not been very many television 
shows on the networks that educate the public about the spectrum. I 
urge those shows to do so.
  In any event, it is not just the broadcast spectrum we are dealing 
with here. It is all the spectrum out there that is being used. New 
technologies may make four or five uses out of the spectrum where once 
only one use was possible. Something designed for one use can now be 
used for transmitting data and other things. As new technology and new 
inventions come into play, it may be worth four, five times as much. 
Where once you might have one TV channel, you now may be able to have 
four. You may be able to transmit data on one station and do something 
else with another.
  So the taxpayers have a real interest in this, as do budget 
balancers. We did not really try to solve this problem in the 
telecommunications bill. Some misunderstandings are floating around. We 
more or less delayed a decision on the spectrum in the 
telecommunications bill. So I have suggested that we have a grand 
spectrum debate and that we have a spectrum bill. We have already had 
hearings. I suggest that we go through all the spectrum, from the 
broadcasters' use to other, different uses of it, including that held 
in public and private use. That we look at what the military has and 
what the CIA has. We will have to have a classified briefing.
  We should not hold up the telecommunications bill for that purpose. 
It is my hope that in a few days we can work out some language, or 
leave the present language in the bill.
  So we are making a good-faith effort. I am saying that I do not think 
we can solve all of the spectrum issues at this time. I have tried to 
do it. The votes are not there. We are in a deadlock situation.
  Let us not lose the whole telecommunications bill over this matter. 
It is too good a bill. We have worked long and hard. It is a bipartisan 
bill. It is the best bill in this Congress, in this Senator's opinion. 
It will create jobs in our country. It will provide a road map for 
investment.
  I urge that we act on it soon. I am continuing to lobby our leaders 
and everybody else. In fact, yesterday the spectrum and the 
telecommunications bill were the subject of Senator Dole's remarks when 
he traveled in South Dakota. I commend him again and thank him for his 
kind remarks about my work on this bill.
  I hope we can work out these problems soon. I urge all groups not to 
slip into lethargy. We have a lot of work left to do on this bill. It 
will not pass automatically. We must keep working at it. That is what I 
am doing. That is what I urge my colleagues to do.

                          ____________________