[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 93 (Monday, June 28, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7684-S7685]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        RURAL SATELLITE SERVICE

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, rural states are particularly affected by 
satellite service. Telecommunications is changing the way things are 
done, providing more and more of our services through satellites. Yet 
we have difficulty with people who live in low-density areas, people 
who live in the country, receiving their local satellite service.
  This is a common problem in a low-density State such as Wyoming, 
where we have fewer people, where we have more rural areas. Many issues 
we work on have a unique impact on people who live in rural areas. The 
reregulation of electricity, for example, has a different impact in 
Wyoming than it does in Pennsylvania. That is true, also, with the 
delivery of health care services.
  It is important, when we deal with nationwide issues, that we also 
take some time to give special attention to the differences that exist 
among consumers in the country. That is particularly true with TV. 
Technology and satellite TV have allowed TV services to be delivered in 
places it could never be delivered before. However, there are many 
rural people who cannot receive over the air television signals. That 
is the case in Wyoming.
  Technology and satellite TV are great because they often provide 
people with more services. Indeed, it does. But it is difficult to 
provide local TV, local news, and local emergency signals that are 
given by the local stations. When a satellite company cannot do that, 
customers get their NBC broadcast in Rawlins, WY, they receive it from 
Chicago. That is a problem in terms of being able to have those local 
services available to consumers.
  It is important, No. 1, we maintain local broadcast markets. It is 
important, as well, that people who live in that vicinity have the 
opportunity to see local news, to hear about local activities, to 
participate locally. The problem is, how do you provide satellite 
service and at the same time provide local news and local activities, 
as well?
  This week, the Senate-House conference will be meeting regarding the 
Satellite Home Viewers Improvement Act. Hopefully, something will come 
out of that. This is legislation which will enable more customers to 
receive broadcast network television. The question is, of course, who 
can adequately receive local service from their own antenna and who can 
receive these local broadcasts through a staellite provider.
  I had meetings in Wyoming this week. We only have two areas in 
Wyoming where the local TV has a designated area; the others do not. 
There are 15 States that do not have local-to-local service at all. 
When people up for satellite TV and they want the national broadcast--
which is done locally, if you can receive that from an antenna--viewers 
are blocked from receiving it on the satellite.
  The difficulty is determining the strength of the signal that comes 
to that antenna. There is a great difference of view about that. 
Frankly, it is very uncertain who makes that determination.
  The first issue is determining the strength of the signal. You have 
to find out if that signal is strong enough so you qualify to get it 
over your antenna, or have a technician show that it isn't.
  That is the difference of view. There needs to be a third party who 
says, whether you have adequate signal strength. Some viewers are 
behind a mountain or in a valley and can't get it. That is part of the 
problem.
  Another problem is considering the local market. Over 25 percent of 
the viewers in Wyoming receive their TV from satellites. This is the 
third highest percentage, I believe, in the United States. That is not 
a huge number of people, but it is a very high percentage of people.
  Without satellite access of course, the customers have no TV at all. 
Under the current situation, the TV they do get often comes from 
distant network stations.
  There are two problems. One is that there has been a moratorium so 
these viewers could continue to get their services. That moratorium is 
scheduled to expire at the end of this month for folks in Grade A. In 
the Grade B contour network service expires at the end of the year; and 
there is nothing to be done in the interim. We need to deal with the 
immediacy of the problem--hopefully give customers another moratorium 
to continue network service. Second, we need to decide how we can get 
local-to-local coverage, how we can get the local TV station carried in 
a ``must carry'' proposition.
  There are two difficulties. One, I am told--and I am not completely 
persuaded--that there is a lack of capacity on the satellites. In order 
to do that, additional satellites must be launched to carry all the 
local stations so people can get local broadcasts. Of course, that runs 
into the third issue--money.
  I know the folks in Kansas would be just as excited about having TV 
coverage as the folks in Wyoming; and I am sure the Presiding Officer 
would be instrumental in making this happen.
  In summary, I think many individuals would like to use satellites for 
their TV viewing. People in the country also want to have their local 
station available to them. They do not want to be blocked from 
receiving NBC or CBS because they are within the area that their local 
station carries, despite the fact they can't get it well on their own 
TV.
  This is a problem that can have a happy resolution. Ideally, everyone 
could receive TV and have a good picture. Ideally, everyone could view 
their local station. We will work toward this end. I hope the 
conference committee meeting now can help find a way to provide a 
remedy for the short term and then set up an efficient system as we 
look to the future.
  We have written a letter to the committee--I think there are 24 
signatures on this letter--urging they set up a commission to determine 
how this might be done to resolve the question in the long term. I am 
optimistic that can be done.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the letter be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                    Washington, DC, June 11, 1999.
     Hon. John McCain,
     Chairman,
     The Honorable Ernest F. Hollings,
     Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
         Transportation, Dirksen Senate Office Building, 
         Washington, DC.
     Hon. Orrin G. Hatch,
     Chairman,
     The Honorable Patrick J. Leahy,
     Ranking Member, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Dirksen 
         Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Colleagues: We are writing today to request your 
     support for efforts to ensure local service for small 
     television markets during conference committee deliberation 
     of comprehensive satellite legislation.
       While we support provisions in this legislation that will 
     allow the satellite retransmission of local television 
     signals back into local markets (``local into local''), we 
     are concerned that satellite providers are not expected to 
     provide local service to the 19 million U.S. households in 
     the smallest 150 rural and less populated markets. We believe 
     that all Americans should receive the benefits of 
     educational, informational and entertainment programming 
     resulting from the reception of local signals.
       We are particularly concerned that at least 15 states, 
     including many of our own, do not have a single television 
     market which will receive local television retransmission. 
     Therefore, disagreements will continue over importation of 
     distant network signals, and worse, rural America will be 
     deprived of important communications access.

[[Page S7685]]

       While the legislation passed by the Senate requires the FCC 
     to report on methods of facilitating ``local into local'', we 
     believe there should be a more focused effort towards the 
     goal of implementing ``local into local'' as soon as 
     technically possible. To this end, we support the creation of 
     a Local Television Planning Group that would make 
     recommendations to Congress to ensure that all local 
     television signals are retransmitted by appropriate 
     technologies as soon as practicable. This Planning Group 
     should be convened under the auspices of the National 
     Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), and 
     should include representative local broadcasters and 
     knowledgeable senior staff drawn from relevant federal 
     agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission, the 
     Department of Justice, and agencies within the Department of 
     Agriculture that specialize in providing services to rural 
     America. We believe this is a workable approach that ensures 
     no portions of America are left out of the information age.
       Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to 
     working with you on this important issue for rural Americans.
           Sincerely,
         Max Baucus, Tom Daschle, Tim Johnson, Harry Reid, Larry 
           E. Craig, Chuck Grassley, Jim Bunning, Pat Roberts, Bob 
           Smith, Craig Thomas, Bob Kerrey, Tom Harkin, Paul 
           Wellstone, Byron L. Dorgan, Jim Inhofe, Wayne Allard, 
           James M. Jeffords, Michael B. Enzi, Susan Collins, 
           Michael Crapo, Rod Grams, Frank H. Murkowski, Thad 
           Cochran, Ron Wyden.

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________