[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 49 (Wednesday, April 17, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3443-S3445]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           BROADCAST BLACKOUT

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, TV broadcasters have broken their trust with 
the American people. For more than 40 years, the American people have 
generously lent TV station owners our Nation's airwaves for free. Now 
some broadcasters want more and will stop at nothing to get it. They 
are bullying Congress and running a multimillion-

[[Page S3444]]

dollar scare campaign to mislead the public.
  The reason is simple: Why pay for something when you can get it for 
free? But there is one small problem. The airwaves are the Nation's 
most valuable natural resource and are worth billions and billions of 
dollars. They do not belong to the broadcasters. They do not belong to 
the phone companies. They do not belong to the newspapers. Each and 
every wave belongs to the American people, the American taxpayers. Our 
airwaves are just as much a national resource as our national parks.
  Enter the TV broadcasters. Earlier this year, I blocked their 
legislative efforts to get spectrum for free. At my request, Congress 
is now holding open hearings on reforming our spectrum policies.
  Apparently, the democratic process is not good enough for most 
broadcasters. So TV broadcasters are now running ads and so-called 
public service announcements, claiming that TV will die without this 
huge corporate welfare program, this billions and billions of dollars 
they want to take away from the American taxpayers. Of course, they do 
not call this giveaway welfare; they call it a tax. Imagine calling a 
giveaway a tax.
  Also, I am aware that some broadcasters have asked Members of 
Congress to drop by their stations. In the midst of these friendly 
discussions, the broadcasters say, ``I thought you might want to see 
the ad we are considering running in your district.''
  So much for subtlety.
  It seems to me the broadcasters should be happy with the deal they 
already have. They have been getting free channels for years. In 
return, they fulfill public interest obligations, such as reporting 
news and information. Now they want more airwaves for free.
  Newspapers also report the news, but Congress has never had to buy 
them off. It seems to me that giving broadcasters free spectrum is like 
giving newspapers free paper from our national forests.
  Congress has never challenged whether broadcasters should be allowed 
to keep a channel. Instead, we are simply stating that if broadcasters 
want more channels, then they are going to pay the taxpayers for them. 
That does not kill television.
  The broadcasters say they cannot afford to buy additional airwaves, 
which the Congressional Budget Office estimates is worth at least $12 
billion. Last time I checked, the American people cannot afford to give 
it to them free.
  We are trying to balance a budget with tax cuts for families with 
children, reducing spending, and closing loopholes.
  Broadcasters say that if they had to pay for the extra airwaves, it 
would be the end of so-called free, over-the-air television. The facts 
speak otherwise. According to the Washington Post, over the last 2 
years broadcast deals in the private sector amounted to a whooping 
$31.3 billion. That is with a ``b''--billion dollars.
  Here is another fact. All TV broadcast licenses in America were 
originally given away for free, but only 6 percent are still in the 
hands of the original licensee. The other 94 percent have been bought 
and sold. My point is that broadcasters have a long history of paying 
top dollar for existing channels. Somehow they cannot afford any new 
ones unless the taxpayer picks up the tab.


                     unfunded mandate on consumers

  Before Congress lets huge moneyed interests get their fingers on this 
national resource, we must be certain that the American taxpayer is 
fully protected. The policy broadcasters' want will not only force 
taxpayers to giveaway valuable airwaves, it will also force consumers 
to spend hundreds of billions of their own dollars on new equipment 
which is a point that I think has been overlooked. They have been 
trying to frighten everybody with television, and to get their way are 
going to have to have another television or some attachment.
  The fact is that federally mandating a transition to digital 
broadcast will ultimately render all television sets in the country 
obsolete. You will not be able to use your television set.
  Consumers will be forced to buy either new television sets or 
convertor boxes to receive so-called free, over-the-air broadcasts.
  Last year we passed the unfunded mandates law. Perhaps some have 
forgotten, but that law applies to more than just State and local 
governments. It applies to the private sector and most importantly to 
individuals.
  The impact of the broadcasters' plan would be dramatic. There are 222 
million television sets in this country. At a Senate Budget Committee 
hearing last month, the broadcasters testified that the average digital 
television set's estimated cost is $1,500, while the less expensive 
converter box will cost approximately $500. Replacing every television 
set in America with a digital one would cost $333 billion. Using the 
less expensive converter box would cost $111 billion. No doubt about 
it, consumers will not be happy that Congress made this choice for 
them. That is precisely what we are going to do here unless we wake up 
and smell something.
  The American people should have a say before Congress makes a 
decision on spectrum. After all, the airwaves are theirs and so are 
their TV sets. Neither belongs to the broadcasters.


                            NETWORK COVERAGE

  Finally, TV broadcasters have rightly kept a watchful eye on a 
bloated Government. Whether it was $600 toilet seats or $7,000 coffee 
pots, they have always helped us quickly identify waste. But they have 
been strangely silent on this issue. In contrast, story after story, 
and editorial after editorial, protested this giveaway in the print 
media.
  In fact, I have a whole bookful here. In fact, this is loaded with 
editorials and comments about this giveaway. You do not see it on 
television.
  There have been a few exceptions. I want to be fair. CNN, which is a 
cable network, has reported on this issue, while CBS made an attempt a 
month ago. So-called public interest obligations seem to have gone out 
the window when it is not in the broadcasters' self-interest.
  If five Senators took a legitimate trip somewhere overseas to 
investigate something that might be costing the American people money, 
that is reported on the evening news as a junket costing thousands and 
thousands of dollars to the American taxpayer because the Senators were 
over there trying to see if they were spending too much on foreign aid 
maybe in Bosnia or maybe somewhere else. That would be news. Maybe it 
is news. Maybe it should be reported. But when it comes to billion 
dollar giveaways, to them ``mum'' is the word. You never hear about it 
on television. Dan Rather will not utter a word. Peter Jennings, Tom 
Brokow--maybe they do not know about it. But I would say to the 
American taxpayers and the people with TV sets that somebody had better 
protect the American public.
  I have even had a threatening letter, which I will not put in the 
file, that if I do not shape up and stop talking about this, this 
broadcaster is going to get his 700 employees to vote for someone else 
in November. That is intimidation.
  I have no quarrel with the broadcasters. I have always thought they 
were my friends. But it seems to me that when we are trying to balance 
the budget and when we are asking everybody to make a sacrifice, then 
we ought to make certain that we do not give something away worth 
billions and billions and billions of dollars.
  Maybe the broadcasters felt this issue was not newsworthy. But if 
that is the case, why did the National Association of Broadcasters vote 
to go on the offensive and launch a multi-million-dollar ad campaign to 
preserve, as they spin it, free, over-the-air broadcasting?
  I have already indicated it is not going to be free. It is going to 
cost you $500 for a converter box or $1,500 for a new TV set. That is 
not free.
  I did not realize that ad campaigns have replaced the evening news.


                               conclusion

  Mr. President, if the broadcasters have a case to make, Congress is 
prepared to hear them. We are having fair and open hearings. That is 
what democracy is all about. It is not about distorting the truth and 
making thinly veiled threats. The American people know this. And 
despite what some might think, we are not easily duped.
  I hope that fairness will prevail. I do not know what the value 
should be. But we should find out. Maybe it is $1. Maybe it is $1 
million. Maybe it is $50

[[Page S3445]]

billion. But I never found anything wrong with having a hearing and 
asking the people that might be impacted, including the American 
consumer, to come to testify. I believe many broadcasters understand 
their responsibility. Maybe there are only a few out there leading this 
effort to mislead the American public and to walk away with billions of 
dollars in welfare from the Congress of the United States.
  I know this is not a very popular thing to do--to get up and take on 
TV broadcasters or radio broadcasters because they have a lot of free 
access to the airwaves. But I believe, if we are serious about the 
budget and serious about the future, serious about the taxpayers, that 
it at least ought to be raised.
  So I think they are all legitimate. But I think those broadcasters 
who have not been blinded by greed--and there are a lot of them out 
there that have not--will help shape the future of television.
  Again, I must say that I know it does not get a lot of attention. But 
there are all kinds of columns here by different people, William Safire 
and others, page after page, hundreds of pages of stories about this 
giveaway.
  I know the broadcasters are meeting in Las Vegas, and I think it is 
time to throw the dice and have a hearing. Maybe they can make their 
case. That is what Congress is all about.
  But it seems to me that the President, I think, should have an 
interest in this. It is not a partisan issue. It is an issue of how we 
are going to pay the bills, how we are going to balance the budget, and 
what amount will properly be received in charging for spectrum.
  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, will the majority leader yield for a 
question?
  Mr. DOLE. I am happy to yield.
  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Does the leader have in mind to schedule hearings and 
to ask the administration officials to testify?
  Mr. DOLE. In fact, I think we have had one. Senator Pressler, 
chairman of the Commerce Committee, had 1 day of hearings. There will 
be another day of hearings, I think, next week to be followed by 
additional hearings. So there is an effort to have everybody come in 
and testify and then make a judgment.
  I see the Senator from South Dakota is on the floor now. That was 
part of the agreement on the telecommunications bill--that the bill 
would go forward, there would be hearings, and Congress would make a 
judgment for the American people. We are going to have to cough up the 
money on what we should do.
  Mr. MOYNIHAN. I thank the Senator. It is none too soon.

                          ____________________