[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 124 (Thursday, September 17, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10524-S10525]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Hatch, Mr. DeWine, and 
        Mr. Kohl):
  S. 2494. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
151 et seq.) to enhance the ability of direct broadcast satellite and 
other multichannel video providers to compete effectively with cable 
television systems, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.


             THE MULTICHANNEL VIDEO COMPETITION ACT OF 1998

   Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I introduce legislation that will 
address two problems confronting the millions of Americans who 
subscribe to satellite TV service. I am delighted to have Senators 
Hatch, Leahy, DeWine and Kohl as original co-sponsors.
  These two problems involve the legal and practical difficulties 
satellite TV providers currently face in providing network TV stations 
as part of their service package.
  The first problem is that the law effectively prevents satellite TV 
companies from providing local network stations to their subscribers. 
That hampers the ability of satellite TV to compete effectively with 
cable TV and, by doing so, to check cable rate increases.
  The second problem is that existing law also forbids satellite TV 
providers from offering distant network stations unless the subscriber 
happens to be located beyond the reach of local network stations. But 
the satellite companies and their subscribers claim that the law's 
definition of what constitutes decent off-air TV reception is too 
narrow. This has resulted in many situations in which consumers who 
cannot receive local network stations as a practical matter, are 
nevertheless regarded as being able to receive them, as a legal matter. 
In many cases, satellite TV providers are offering distant network 
signals even though it's actually illegal. This has led to litigation 
and a court order that could cause more than a million satellite TV 
subscribers throughout the country to lose their network TV within the 
next several weeks.
  Mr. President, we need to fix these problems, and we need to fix them 
quickly. No satellite TV company should be forced to suddenly 
discontinue any customer's network TV service, and satellite TV 
companies should be able to provide their subscribers with local 
network TV stations, just as cable TV companies can.
  The legislation being introduced today is intended to strike a 
reasonable balance between the competing interests of cable operators, 
broadcasters, and satellite TV providers, to enable satellite TV 
providers to offer network stations, to assure that no satellite TV 
subscriber is unfairly deprived of network TV service, to assure local 
broadcasters are not deprived of the support of their local audience, 
and to make satellite TV a more effective competitive alternative to 
cable TV.
  This legislation will also require changes to the Copyright Act, the 
Satellite Home Viewers Act, and the Communications Act. The 
distinguished Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator 
Hatch, has developed legislation to give satellite TV providers a 
compulsory copyright license enabling them to offer local TV stations. 
I am also cosponsoring this legislation.
  The bill I am introducing today will be merged with Senator Hatch's 
legislation to provide a comprehensive and workable solution to all 
these problems. Let me briefly describe what my bill provides.
  My bill directs the Federal Communications Commission to straighten 
out the rules governing satellite TV companies' carriage of distant 
network TV stations, and provides guidelines for the Commission's 
decision. It will also guarantee that no satellite TV subscriber loses 
network stations before the FCC issues revised rules next

[[Page S10525]]

February. It will require that satellite TV companies carry all local 
TV stations, just as cable systems must, when it becomes feasible for 
them to do so. In the interim it will allow them to carry fewer than 
all local stations as long as they compensate any local stations that 
are not carried for any loss of revenue the stations will suffer as a 
result.
  During the last several weeks the Majority Leader, Senator Lott, and 
the Ranking Member of the Commerce Committee, Senator Fritz Hollings, 
have worked tirelessly with the broadcast and satellite industries to 
develop a compromise that will avoid the disruption of satellite TV 
subscribers network TV service until this legislation can be enacted 
into law. I would like to recognize them for their efforts on behalf of 
every member of the public who subscribes to multichannel video 
service, whether by satellite or by cable. All of us should be grateful 
for their leadership on this issue.
  I intend to hold hearings on the status of the parties efforts to 
reach a compromise, and on the legislation sponsored by Senator Hatch 
and myself, next week. It is my hope that broadcasters and satellite TV 
providers can reach a mutually-acceptable temporary agreement that will 
enable Senator Hatch and myself to enact our comprehensive legislation 
as soon as possible, and in any event no later than early in the next 
Session of Congress.
Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I support this measure, which will 
help create competition between satellite and cable television. Read in 
tandem with our Judiciary Committee proposal, it offers the promise of 
a comprehensive solution that removes some of the roadblocks to true 
video competition. Let me commend Senators McCain, Hollings, Hatch, 
Leahy, DeWine and Lott for their efforts, all of which were 
instrumental in the creation of a comprehensive package with a real 
chance to be enacted this year.
  Mr. President, let me explain why we need to move on these measures 
before the opportunity passes us by. Consumers want real choices. But 
they won't have a fair opportunity to choose between cable, satellite 
or other video systems if their network signals are, in essence, 
separate and unequal.
  The legislation that the Judiciary and Commerce Committees have been 
working on together would eliminate this problem. They extend the 
Satellite Home Viewer Act, give satellite carriers the ability to 
provide local television broadcast signals (while appropriately phasing 
in must-carry), reduce the royalty fees for these signals, give the FCC 
time to take a much-needed second look at the definition of ``unserved 
households,'' and make sure no one--no one--is terminated before 
February 28th of next year.
  Mr. President, these bills are not perfect pieces of legislation. And 
we invite the interested parties to work with us to improve them. But 
the overall package is a fair and comprehensive one. If we continue to 
work together, then consumers will have real choices among video 
providers, and that television programming will be more available and 
affordable for all of us. In addition, we will help to preserve local 
television stations, who provide all of us with vital information like 
news, weather, and special events--especially sports.
  I urge my colleagues to support these bipartisan bills, which will 
move us toward video competition in the next millennium, and I hope we 
can enact them as one before this Congress adjourns in October.
                                 ______