[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 49 (Wednesday, April 17, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3445-S3446]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           TELECOMMUNICATIONS

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I must take exception with the 
statements by the distinguished majority leader. What really occurred 5 
years ago is that hearings both in our Committee of Commerce, which I 
was chairing at the time, and the Federal Communications Commission as 
to how to bring about high-definition television, going from the analog 
signal to the high-definition digital television signal--similar to how 
we went earlier from AM radio to FM radio and we gave away the 
licenses, and now most of the radio audience predominates in FM.
  On this particular score, there are all kinds of problems. First, 
there is a problem faced by the local broadcasters. To change over from 
their analog signal to a digital signal is going to be a cost of 
somewhere between $2 and $10 million. They are not going to put that $2 
to $10 million in changing over unless and until there are digital TV 
sets. The people who are going to purchase the sets are not going to 
purchase them until the broadcasters bring about digital television.

[[Page S3446]]

  So working as the public body in the public interest, we reasoned, 
after these hearings, that there ought to be a transition to change 
over, to certainly not penalize established free broadcasts in 
America--it is not a gift, if you please, but, on the contrary, we need 
to get them to switch from analog to digital and then we'll take the 
one that they relinquished and auction it. Nobody is getting anything 
free. It is necessary to bring about that particular switch from the 
analog to the high-definition television that will truly benefit 
consumers.
  Chairman Sikes, a Republican chairman of the Federal Communications 
Commission, enunciated this policy. We had 2 years of hearings in our 
Commerce Committee. We, in a bipartisan fashion, got the movement going 
with respect to the broadcasters. You have to sort of sell this idea to 
move them along.
  We are trying now to get the criteria for high-definition television 
agreed upon by all the technical entities that are interested in this 
particular move. And the Federal Communications Commission is having 
hearings to determine the technology that should be used. Once that is 
done this spring, we hope to move forward and, as best we can, 
accelerate this improved television viewing for the American public.

  And now this thing about balancing the budget, this crowd is running 
up $1 billion a day in interest costs. You raise spending $1 billion a 
day while we are talking that you do not want to pay for. I put in a 
value-added tax bill to pay for it, but nobody else around here wants 
to pay for it--talking about paying the bills and balancing the budget. 
But right is right and fair is fair.
  The broadcasters have not been going around soliciting or asking for 
a giveaway of billions of dollars or whatever it is. We have to 
maintain free over-the-air broadcasting. They used to have almost 100 
percent of the broadcast audience. They are down to 60 percent. Cable 
television and direct broadcast satellites are taking over and 
everything of that kind. In a very real sense, we are very careful 
about the regular analog stations that you and I watch every day and 
every evening.
  So the air should be clear. You can have 100 hearings. You can go 
back on it. You can come up with the sale and make a lot of money, but 
the American public is not going to be served. Auctioning the second 
channel would only disadvantage the American consumer. You should not 
reverse a well-studied and well-thought-out policy by a Republican 
administration and a Democratic administration, a Republican committee 
and a Democratic committee. We should stick with the FCC plan--it is 
the best way to ensure free over-the-air television and the taxpayer 
will benefit when the original channel is auctioned.
  This peripheral attack about I am Horatio at the bridge here and I am 
standing up and I am protecting the public, and we want to pay the 
bills and we want to balance the budget, is all hogwash. If you want to 
pay bills, then I say to the Senator, it is in your Finance Committee. 
Pull it out of the Finance Committee and let's vote up and down, 
because you cannot balance the budget without increasing taxes.
  I will make my challenge one more time. I make it time and again. I 
would be delighted to jump off the Capitol dome if you can give me a 7-
year balanced budget without increasing taxes. You cannot do it. I gave 
that to the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee, and he did 
not do it. That was over a year ago. And I am still ready to jump.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah has 15 minutes.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent I might have 2 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and 
it is so ordered. The Senator from Kentucky has 2 minutes.
  Mr. FORD. I thank the Chair, and I thank my friend from Utah.

                          ____________________