[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 124 (Thursday, September 17, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10514-S10515]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            BILL TO PREVENT CUTOFFS OF SATELLITE TV SERVICE

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I have heard from scores of Vermonters 
lately who are steaming mad after being told by their home satellite 
signal providers that they are about to lose some of their network 
satellite channels. They have every right to be upset. It is within 
Congress's ability to un-muddle this mess, and the public has every 
reason to expect Congress to get its act together to do that, and to do 
that promptly.
  While the hills and mountains of Vermont are a natural wonder, they 
can also be barriers to reception of clear TV signals over-the-air with 
rooftop antennas. At my home in Middlesex, Vermont, we can only get one 
channel clearly, and lots of ghosts on the other channel we receive. We 
get so many ghosts on our family set that it looks like Mark McGwire 
and Sammy Sosa are hitting four homeruns at a time.
  That is why Vermonters have chosen satellite reception: They cannot 
get a clear picture without it.
  I am gratified tonight that we are finally in a position to announce 
an understanding that I hope will keep satellite TV viewers from having 
to lose station signals this year. I am joining with both the Chairman 
of the Judiciary Committee and the Chairman of the Commerce Committee 
on two separate bills designed fix these problems. I am certain that 
most Senators will be pleased with this breakthrough, and I hope we can 
pass this bill without objection in the Senate.
  Under a court order, thousands of viewers--many of them living in my 
home state of Vermont--will be cut off from receiving satellite TV 
stations that they are paying to receive. We have 65,000 home satellite 
dishes in Vermont. the court order directly affects only those 
subscribers who signed up for service after March 11, 1997, but most 
subscribers are being warned nonetheless by their signal providers that 
they will soon lose several network channels they now receive.
  This huge policy glitch is intruding right now into hundreds of 
thousands of homes. It is a royal mess, and Congress and the FCC need 
to fix it.
  I introduced a bill in March of this year with Chairman Hatch so that 
we could try to resolve this issue before it became a major problem. We 
have tried in the many months since then to push Congress toward a 
solution. Many viewers have lost signals already. We are trying to get 
these bills passed in the next couple of weeks to restore service and 
to keep other households for losing their satellite TV signals--not 
just in Vermont but throughout the nation.
  I am pleased that Chairman Hatch and I have worked out arrangements 
with the Chairman of the Commerce Committee and other Senators active 
on this issue, including Senators DeWine and Kohl, that significantly 
raise the prospects that Congress can soon pass a bill to prevent the 
cutoff of thousands of viewers this month and in October. We hope and 
we believe that all Senators can support this approach.
  This legislation would keep signals available to Vermonters and 
subscribers in other states until the FCC has a chance to address these 
issues by the end of next February.
  Our legislation will direct the FCC to address this problem for the 
future, and our proposal ultimately will mean--as technology advances--
that Vermonters will be able to receive satellite TV for all Vermont 
full-power TV stations. Viewers in all states would be similarly 
protected. This effort eventually will promote head-to-head competition 
between cable and satellite TV providers.
  The goal is to provide satellite home viewers in Vermont and across 
the nation with more choices and more channel selections, and at lower 
rates. The evidence is clear that in areas of the country where there 
is full competition between cable providers, rates to customers are 
considerably lower. The same will be true when there is greater 
effective competition between cable providers and satellite signal 
providers.
  Over time, this effort will permit satellite TV providers to offer a 
full selection of local TV channels to viewers--even to those living in 
or near Burlington, Vermont, where local signals are now blocked.
  Under current law, those families must get their local TV signals 
over an antenna which often does not provide a clear picture. These 
bills eventually will remove that legal limitation that prohibits 
satellite carriers from offering local TV signals to viewers.
  Over time, satellite carriers will have to follow the rules that 
cable providers have to follow which will mean that they must carry all 
local Vermont TV stations. In addition, Vermont stations will be 
available over satellite to many areas of Vermont that today are 
unserved by satellite or by cable.
  Vermonters now receive network satellite signals with programming 
from stations in other states. In other words, they may get a CBS 
station from another state but not WCAX, the Burlington CBS affiliate.
  By allowing satellite providers to offer a wider variety of 
programming, including local stations, the satellite industry would be 
able to compete with cable, and the cable industry will be competing 
with satellite carriers. Cable will continue to be a highly effective 
competitor with its ability to offer extremely high-speed Internet 
connections to homes and businesses.
  The second major improvement offered through our legislation is that 
satellite carriers that offer local Vermont channels in their mix of 
programming will be able to reach Vermonters throughout our state. The 
system will be based on regions called Designated Market Areas, or 
DMAs. Vermont has one large DMA covering most of the state--the 
Burlington-Plattsburg DMA, and two smaller ones in southeastern 
Vermont--the Albany-Schenectady-Troy DMA includes Bennington County--
and in southwestern Vermont, where the Boston DMA includes Windham 
County.
  Using current technology, signals would be provided by spot-beam 
satellites using some 150 regional uplink sites throughout the nation 
to beam local signals up to two satellites. Those satellites would use 
60 or so spotbeams to send those local signals, received from the 
regional uplinks, back to satellite dish owners. High-definition TV 
would be offered under this system at a later date. This system is 
likely to take two to three years to be put into full operation. In the 
meantime, another company called EchoStar may provide some local-into-
local service in some parts of the country.
  Under the bill that Senator Hatch and I introduced in March, this 
spotbeam technology would mean that home owners with satellite dishes 
in downtown Burlington, and in every county in Vermont except Windham 
and Bennington, would receive all the full-power TV stations in the 
Burlington-Plattsburg DMA, including PBS stations. Bennington residents 
would receive the stations in the Schnectady-Albany-Troy DMA, and 
Windham County residents would receive Boston signals, since they are 
in the Boston DMA. Over time these counties could be blended into the 
Burlington-Plattsburg DMA.
  Since technology advances so quickly, other systems could be 
developed before this bill is fully implemented that would provide 
similar service but using different technology. And existing systems 
would be accommodated

[[Page S10515]]

under our legislation, but those systems would follow rules similar to 
current rules until conversion to this new technology takes place.
  It is time for this Congress to step up to the plate and solve this 
policy nightmare that is now at the door of countless homes across the 
nation. Our constituents rightly will not take ``not now'' as an 
acceptable answer.
  I commend Chairman Hatch and Chairman McCain for the leadership they 
have shown in solving this problem, and I look forward to continue 
working closely with them and with other Senators as we move this 
solution toward, and eventually across, the goal line.

                          ____________________