[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 149 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11402-S11403]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    REVERSING FCC TOWER-SITING RULES

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I have strongly objected to the proposed 
Federal Communications Commission rules that I believe essentially rob 
States and communities of the authority to decide where unsightly 
telecommunications towers should be built, and I want to renew my 
objection to those proposed rules.
  Back when the Telecommunications Act of 1996 passed, there were only 
five Senators who voted against it. I was one of the five. One of my 
fears was that the will and voices of States and of local communities 
would be muzzled.
  As a lifelong Vermonter, I didn't want to see that happen to my 
State. Unfortunately, the fears I had at that time have been confirmed. 
Under the so-called telecommunications reform bill, Vermont towns and 
towns in other States have very little say when big and unsightly 
towers are proposed. Towns can no longer just say, ``No, you can't put 
that awful tower in our community, blocking our scenic vistas.'' It is 
unfortunate that 91 Senators said they were willing to see the rights 
of towns and cities trampled that way.
  The bill also prohibits towns and cities from having stricter health 
and safety standards regarding environmental effects of radio frequency 
emissions.
  Here is what has happened in Vermont. Keep in mind, Mr. President, 
that our State is one of the most beautiful States in the country. 
People come to our State because of the magnificent views. And those of 
us who were born there want to remain there because of this beauty. Now 
we are being told that no matter how much we have done to promote this 
beauty, if somebody wants to just slap up telecommunication towers 
right in the middle of the most magnificent vista there may be little 
we can do about it.
  The State of Vermont, from Gov. Howard Dean to the Vermont 
Environmental Board and local zoning officials and mayors and citizens, 
is concerned that it is losing control of the siting and design and 
construction of telecommunication towers and related facilities.
  These people have written to the FCC opposing this rule, and I 
endorse their comments. They have done an excellent job representing 
the views of all Vermonters. As a matter of fact, I also submitted a 
lengthy petition, something I rarely do but I did this as a Vermonter 
hoping that we will influence the FCC.
  I think these tower siting rules should be stopped once and for all. 
We ought to tear them out by their roots which were planted in the 1996 
telecommunications bill.
  To make sure that they can be torn out, I am introducing legislation 
that repeals the authority given to the FCC in 1996 to preempt State 
and local regulations on the placement of new telecommunication towers. 
I don't want Vermont turned into a giant pin cushion with 200-foot 
towers indiscriminately sprouting up on every mountain and in every 
valley, ruining the view that most of us have spent a lifetime 
enjoying.
  I might note that my distinguished colleague from Vermont, Mr. 
Jeffords, is going to join me as a cosponsor of this legislation
  The backbone of Vermont's beauty is its great mountains, surrounded 
by magnificent views of valleys, rivers, and streams. Vermonters do not 
want these scenic vistas destroyed by towers, bristling with all manner 
of antennas and bright lights, strobes, flashes, and everything else 
that destroy this vista.
  I think of my own home, my tree farm in Middlesex, VT. When I step 
out the front door of my home, I look 35 miles down a valley ringed by 
mountains. I live on a dirt road, and I literally cannot see another 
house or another dwelling in any direction. I look at some of the most 
beautiful scenery of Vermont. Frankly, Mr. President, each time I am 
back home this renews my soul and my spirit.
  I am sure all Vermonters and all those who visit us in Vermont feel 
the same way I do about the scenic wonders of our State. Because of 
that, we Vermonters have determined that we want to move with care to 
avoid the indiscriminate placement of towers that would jeopardize one 
of our State's most precious assets. We Vermonters want some say in our 
own life. We Vermonters want some say in protecting what is the best in 
our beautiful State.
  Vermont citizens and communities should be able to participate in the 
important decisions that affect their families and their future. The 
location of large transmission towers have significant effects on 
property values, on health, and enjoyment of one's home, in fact even 
the ability to sell one's home.
  I say the Telecommunications Act went far too far toward preemption 
of local control and now this proposed FCC implementation goes even 
further. Vermont has enacted landmark legislation, Act 250, to preserve 
our environment while permitting growth.
  Understand, when I sit in my home in Vermont, I am connected by 
computer to my office in Washington and my offices in two other 
locations in Vermont. I can communicate with my children wherever they 
are by telephone or by computer. I pull up newspapers that are not 
available to me immediately in Vermont off the Internet. I am for 
progress. I think that is something Vermont has always supported, but 
not for ill-considered, so-called progress at the expense of Vermont 
families and homeowners.
  It is important that Vermont not be left out of technological 
progress, but that is the whole reason Vermont enacted the Act 250 
process. Vermont communities and the State of Vermont have to have a 
role in deciding where these towers are going to go. Vermonters should 
be able to take into account the protection of our scenic

[[Page S11403]]

beauty. It is not enough just to have technological advances.
  So by requiring the companies to work with Vermont towns, acceptable 
alternatives can be found. My bill, again, affirms where the burden of 
proof should be: with the applicant, not the community. I trust 
Vermonters to do what is right to protect our State's beautiful 
scenery. All I am saying, Mr. President, is let Vermonters decide what 
to do with our scenery. The FCC rules should not stand.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who seeks time?
  Mr. THOMAS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, under the order, I believe we had 30 
minutes reserved.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. THOMAS. Several of my associates and I want to take that time to 
talk about the Medicare Beneficiaries Freedom to Contract Act, which we 
think is very important to Medicare recipients and to the system. We 
want to talk about that. However, before we begin, and we will then 
share our time, I yield to the Senator from Kansas for several minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas is recognized.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. Thank you, Mr. President. I thank my colleague from 
Wyoming for yielding a couple minutes. I will be very brief about this 
and pointed.
  (The remarks of Mr. Brownback pertaining to the introduction of S. 
1334 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced 
Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I, again, thank my colleague from 
Wyoming and others for allowing me this opportunity to introduce this 
bill. I yield the floor.
  Mr. THOMAS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.

                          ____________________