[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 157 (Tuesday, November 9, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S14397-S14398]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     THE SATELLITE HOME VIEWER ACT

  Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, I rise to speak for a moment about another 
subject. I do not want to interfere with this important debate, but I 
think the subject I want to speak about is important in its own right. 
I want to put my colleagues and the public on notice about what is 
happening.
  Probably we have all received more telephone calls and more letters 
on the so-called Satellite Home Viewer Act than any issue we have dealt 
with in this Congress. This is an issue that flows from the fact that 
people who have satellite dishes, especially people who live in the 
country, want to have access to their nearest television station. It is 
something we all understand. For those of us who live in the country, 
it is something we want.
  The House of Representatives adopted a very good bill that would 
allow negotiations between satellites and local television stations 
with a goal of bringing the local television station into every living 
room and den in America. This would be a great boon to people who have 
satellite dishes in rural areas.
  That bill was adopted in the House 422 to 1 on April 27. On May 20, 
the Senate unanimously adopted a similar bill. These bills are very 
strongly supported. We are all getting hundreds of telephone calls in 
support of them. They do what each caller wants, and that is make it 
possible for people, especially in rural areas, who have satellite 
dishes to get the news and the weather from the local station, however 
far away that may be.
  The problem is, for some unexplainable reason--at least unexplainable 
to logic--in the conference, rather than adopting the House bill or the 
Senate bill or something in between, the conferees apparently decided 
that not every problem in the world was solved, and therefore in an 
effort to try to solve problems which were not part of either bill, 
they decided to put the American taxpayer on the hook for a $1.25 
billion loan guarantee.
  I want to make it clear. This loan guarantee was not part of the 
Senate bill for which we voted unanimously. It was not part of the 
House bill that passed 422 to 1. It was produced out of whole cloth in 
conference when the basic idea was there are additional problems that 
might be dealt with, so as a result, we want to simply add $1.25 
billion.
  When you approach the people who added it, you get the idea this is 
somehow for small business. But when you read their bill, one of the 
loans can be as large as $625 million. The two obvious beneficiaries 
are two companies, one of which saw its equity value go up 4\1/2\ times 
the rate of the growth of the Dow Industrial Index over the last 12 
months; the other one saw its equity value go up 49 times as fast as 
Dow did in the last 12 months.
  You might wonder why these two extraordinarily successful businesses 
with an explosion in their equity value, as measured by the value of 
common stock, suddenly need the taxpayer to come forth and sign a loan 
guarantee of $1.25 billion to get to the bottom line. I am for the 
satellite bill. I voted for it in the Senate. I would like to see it 
passed. I think it is an important piece of legislation. But I am 
adamantly opposed to Members of the House and the Senate simply 
deciding to put the taxpayer on the hook for $1.25 billion, with a 
provision that was in neither the House bill or Senate bill, a 
provision that cannot be justified by any logic whatsoever.
  I want to make it clear if that bill comes to the floor of the Senate 
and it has that loan guarantee in there obligating the American 
taxpayer for $1.25 billion, money that was not in the House bill, was 
not in the Senate bill, I intend to object to its consideration, and it 
will not become law in this millennium.
  I cannot speak beyond this thousand years. But I can assure you that 
under the rules of the Senate, it will not become law before the turn 
of the new millennium, if then.
  One of the authors of this provision, referring to me, said:
  I don't think anybody would want to have the reputation of having 
cost millions of Americans the loss of their network signal, so I don't 
anticipate problems on either floor.

  My response to our colleague in the House is: Anticipate problems on 
the floor of the Senate. And if anyone is endangering the ability of 
Americans to get the local television signal, it is not me; it is those 
who have added a $1.25 billion loan guarantee in this bill.
  I know there are going to be a lot of people calling my office and 
others. Here is my message: If you are for the satellite bill, if you 
want to be able to get your local television station, don't bother 
calling me. Call the people who want to add to a conference report this 
$1.25 billion giveaway which was not voted on in either House of 
Congress, and say to them: Quit trying to give my money away and give 
me my local television signal.
  I am not going to let this bill be adopted this year with that $1.25 
billion giveaway in it. It is not too late. The conferees can come to 
their senses and take this provision out. It was not in either bill. It 
should not have been there to begin with. We can have the satellite 
bill passed by the end of tomorrow's business. But if it is not taken 
out, it is not going to be adopted. I wanted to come over and make that 
clear so everybody would know exactly where we are. If you want this 
bill, insist the $1.25 billion giveaway be taken out of it. We have the 
ability and we should make it possible for people in the country to get 
the adjacent cities' TV stations. I am for that. I am a direct 
beneficiary of it. Many of the people I care about are.

[[Page S14398]]

  But the idea we are talking about giving away $1.25 billion in loan 
guarantees to some of the most well-off companies in America as a rider 
on this bill is the kind of outrageous legislative action that has to 
be stopped. If they think because the underlying bill is so popular 
that everybody is just going to turn the other way and let this $1.25 
billion giveaway occur, they are wrong. I do not intend to do that. It 
is not going to pass the Senate unless they take it out.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________