[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 96 (Thursday, July 1, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8051-S8053]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    OPEN-MARKET REORGANIZATION FOR THE BETTERMENT OF INTERNATIONAL 
                         TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT

  Mr. BURNS. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to 
consideration of S. 376 as reported by the Commerce Committee.
  Mr. LOTT. Reserving the right to object, and I will not object, I 
just want to commend the Senator from Montana for his dogged 
determination to move this legislation. I am sure that all of its 
imperfections will be resolved in conference. I commend him for his 
efforts.
  I withdraw my reservation.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative assistant read as follows:

       A bill (S. 376) a bill to amend the Communication Satellite 
     Act of 1962 to promote competition and privatization in 
     satellite communications, and for other purposes.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, today the Senate will pass a measure that 
will usher in a new era in the international satellite communications 
marketplace. This bill is the result of months of deliberation among 
many of my colleagues and builds upon a debate from last Congress.
  First and foremost, I extend my appreciation to the distinguished 
chairman of the Communications Subcommittee, Senator Conrad Burns, for 
his unrelenting diligence in working with all parties involved, both in 
the Senate and in the private sector. There were numerous players who 
had a stake or an interest in this reform measure. Senator Burns was 
willing to accommodate their perspectives while remaining true to his 
commitment to move forward. I thank him for that.
  Along with Senator Burns, other Members in this Chamber, Senator 
Breaux, Senator Hollings, Senator Stevens, and others were actively 
engaged in the process. Their contributions enhanced the final product 
in many respects and helped produce a more balanced bill. Let me also 
recognize Senator John McCain, chairman of the Senate Commerce 
Committee. His leadership and his support has been instrumental in 
helping to advance this effort, and I want to thank him as well.
  Reaching a unified unanimous, Senate position on legislation of this 
magnitude was not a simple task. Although the bill garnered widespread 
agreement on principle, the technical issues have not been easy. Some 
were complex, given the marketplace transition from one dominated by 
intergovernmental organizations to one of private sector competition. 
Other issues were straightforward but contentious. This made it 
necessary to take the time and work through some of these areas in a 
fair and open manner. We did, and I am pleased that the Senate has now 
moved forward.
  S. 376 enacts timely reform of a visionary policy adopted by Congress 
in the early 1960s to blaze the trail of a global communications 
network. It was the right policy at the right time. A solid foundation 
was laid as a result, and commercial satellite service has come of age. 
Now, over 35 years later, it is the right time for Congress to enact 
another visionary public policy. One that will move us from a 
marketplace dominated primarily by intergovernmental organizations to 
one of competitive, privately owned companies offering viable 
opportunities and real choices. A marketplace that will reflect today's 
market realities and encourage robust competition in our new satellite 
communications community for years to come. Such services are growing 
in demand, and Congress should act on behalf of consumers. They deserve 
it.
  I always say that nothing could get done in the Senate without 
dedicated staff. Several individuals worked hard to prepare this 
legislation for passage. They include Mark Ashby, Lloyd Ator, Mark 
Buse, Greg Elias, Paula Ford, Leo Giacometto, Carole Grunberg, Maureen 
McLaughlin, Mike Rawson, Greg Rhode, Mitch Rose, Ivan Schlager, and 
Howard Waltzman. I thank them all for their time and their efforts.
  It is my hope this is the year Congress will pass an international 
satellite privatization bill.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to express my concerns 
about S. 376, the international satellite reform legislation. While I 
commend my colleagues who have worked hard on this very important 
issue, I am concerned that there is still more work to do to ensure 
reform that results in a truly competitive market.
  Comprehensive satellite reform is long overdue. The 1962 
Communications Satellite Act is based on a 1960s

[[Page S8052]]

era notion that telecommunications services must be provided by 
national or international monopolies. This thinking gave rise to two 
treaty organizations, INTELSAT and Inmarsat, to provide international 
satellite communications services. Comsat, a private company, was 
created by Congress in 1962 and has been the U.S. representative--known 
as the Signatory--to these intergovernmental organizations. Today, we 
know that technology and the marketplace demand that this monopoly, 
governmental model must give way to private competition.
  S. 376 may be a first step toward reaching the goal of privatizing 
the treaty organizations and reforming the 1962 Act. But more remains 
to be done.
  One important issue that is very troubling to me involves the legal 
immunity that Comsat enjoys as the U.S. Signatory to INTELSAT. This is 
a critical issue. The FCC has found that Comsat's immunity gives it 
significant competitive advantages. Comsat is a publicly-traded private 
company. Legal immunity is an extraordinary advantage in the 
marketplace. It is rare for Congress to grant such a powerful advantage 
to a private commercial company. We must be very careful here.
  I understand that Comsat might remain as the U.S. Signatory until 
INTELSAT is fully privatized, and, therefore, it would retain some 
official responsibility to represent the U.S. government. I understand 
that, in that capacity, it might need legal immunity when it is acting 
at the instruction of the U.S. government. But in every other action it 
takes, at INTELSAT or elsewhere, it should not and does not enjoy legal 
immunity. S. 376 limits Comsat's legal immunity.
  My concern here is a simple one. If Congress by law is bestowing 
legal immunity on a private company, Congress has an obligation to be 
very clear and precise as to what actions are protected. The provisions 
in S. 376 that limits Comsat's immunity is not precise and specific 
enough. However, the intent and wording is plain that as long as Comsat 
represents the U.S. officially at INTELSAT prior to its privatization, 
it may enjoy legal immunity, but that immunity is clearly limited to 
the actions it takes pursuant to the written instruction it receives 
from the U.S. government.
  While the intent is clear that Comsat obtains immunity only when it 
is acting under written government instruction, the language in this 
bill regarding immunity requires further clarification at conference.
  We have a duty to be clear and precise when we grant such an 
extraordinary benefit as legal immunity to a private company. I raise 
this today because I want this issue to be further resolved in the 
Conference Committee, prior to enactment.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues, Senators Hollings, 
McCain, Lott, Stevens, Burns and others on the Commerce Committee to 
ensure that this clarification problem is corrected.
  Mr DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased that today we will pass S. 376, 
which concerns the important topic of International Satellite Reform. I 
have followed the issue with interest for years, in part because in my 
Foreign Relations Committee work, we have addressed the market access 
concerns that are a critical part of opening up this industry.
  Although it is significant to finally have the Senate on record 
supporting the need for a competitive restructuring of the 
international satellite market, this bill will need some work before it 
can achieve that goal. It does not make sense to address this issue for 
the first time in over 35 years, and to leave some issues unresolved. I 
believe that there is room for improvement with respect to balancing 
incentives and leverage in making the international marketplace more 
competitive. I also believe we need to move quickly to normalize our 
relations with Intelsat, and its U.S. component, Comsat.
  I urge the Senate conferees from the Commerce Committee to continue 
their good work by tightening up this bill and removing unnecessary 
loopholes.


                           Amendment No. 1221

  Mr. BURNS. There is a managers' amendment at the desk, and I ask for 
its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Montana [Mr. Burns], for himself, Mr. 
     Lott, and Mr. Stevens, proposes an amendment numbered 1221.

  Mr. BURNS. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment 
be dispensed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:
       Section 4 of S. 376 (as amended by the ``ORBIT'' 
     substitute) is amended by striking proposed
       Section 603 of the Communications Satellite Act of 1962 and 
     inserting the following new section:

     ``SEC. 603. RESTRICTIONS PENDING PRIVATIZATION.

       (a) INTELSAT shall be prohibited from entering the United 
     States market directly to provide any satellite 
     communications services or space segment capacity to carriers 
     (other than the United States signatory) or end users in the 
     United States until July 1, 2001 or until INTELSAT achieves a 
     pro-competitive privatization pursuant to section 613 (a) if 
     privatization occurs earlier.
       (b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), INTELSAT shall be 
     prohibited from entering the United States market directly to 
     provide any satellite communications services or space 
     segment capacity to any foreign signatory, or affiliate 
     thereof, and no carrier, other than the United States 
     signatory, nor any end user, shall be permitted to invest 
     directly in INTELSAT.
       (c) Pending INTELSAT's privatization, the Commission shall 
     ensure that the United States signatory is compensated by 
     direct access users for the costs it incurs in fulfilling its 
     obligations under this Act.
       (d) The provisions of subsections (b) and (c) shall remain 
     in effect only until INTELSAT achieves a pro-competitive 
     privatization pursuant to section 613(a).''
       On line 21, page 32, Section 612(b), insert ``subsection'' 
     after the word ``under''.
       On line 21, page 32, Section 612(b), replace ``consider'' 
     with ``determine whether''.
       On line 23, page 32, Section 612(b), insert ``exist'' after 
     the word ``connections''.
       On line 9, page 33, Section 612(b)(4), after ``ownership'', 
     insert ``and whether the affiliate is independent of IGO 
     signatories or former signatories who control 
     telecommunications market access in their home territories.''
       On line 19, page 35, section 613(c)(1), after ``taxation'', 
     insert ``and does not unfairly benefit from ownership by 
     former signatories who control telecommunications market 
     access to their home territories.''
       On line 13, page 37, Section 613(d), replace ``consider'' 
     with ``determine''.
       On line 14, page 37, Section 613(d), insert ``and 
     Inmarsat'' after ``INTELSAT''.

  Mr. BURNS. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be considered 
as read and agreed to, the committee substitute be agreed to, as 
amended, and the bill be read for the third time and passed, the motion 
to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements relating to 
the bill be printed in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment (No. 1221) was agreed to.
  The committee substitute, as amended, was agreed to.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read 
the third time, and passed.
  (The bill will be printed in a future edition of the Record.)
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I thank our distinguished Majority Leader 
and Senator Stevens for working with me, Senator McCain, Senator 
Hollings, and Senator Breaux on the passage of S. 376, the Open-Market 
Reorganization for the Betterment of International Telecommunications 
Act, better known as ``ORBIT.''
  The passage of ORBIT by unanimous consent today clearly indicates the 
Senate's overwhelming support for the approach taken in ORBIT to reform 
our satellite communications laws. I look forward to working with my 
good friend in the other body, Chairman Bliley, on getting this 
legislation enacted into law this year.
  ORBIT is a truly bipartisan bill that updates the Satellite 
Communications Act of 1962, expands competition, and encourages new 
market entrants in satellite communications. It will help to secure the 
rapid and pro-competitive privatization of INTELSAT by a date certain 
of January 1, 2002. The bill provides new incentives for INTELSAT's 
privatization, while at the same time, carries tough consequences if 
INTELSAT fails to achieve this important objective.
  The bill also brings needed reform to the U.S. signatory to INTELSAT, 
COMSAT, by removing its special

[[Page S8053]]

privileges and immunities. In addition, the bill eliminates outdated 
statutory restrictions on the ownership of COMSAT, which will allow 
COMSAT to function like a normal, private commercial company.
  ORBIT will enhance competition in satellite communications, bringing 
far reaching and long-term benefits to consumers both here and abroad. 
I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and I especially want 
to thank the staff. The staff of all parties was involved in this. 
There have been long hours and long days devoted to this particular 
issue.

  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I yield to the Senator from Texas.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.

                          ____________________