[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 72 (Monday, June 12, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4937-S4938]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    LOCAL TELEVISION AMENDMENT TO THE INTERNET NONDISCRIMINATION ACT

  Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an amendment I 
filed this past week to H.R. 3709, the Internet Nondiscrimination Act. 
This amendment has a twofold purpose. First, it highlights the need to 
act on S. 2097, the Launching Our Communities' Access to Local 
Television Act of 2000. This critical legislation passed the Senate by 
a unanimous, 97-0, vote on March 30 of this year. The House version of 
this bill, H.R. 3615, also passed by an overwhelming 375-37 margin. Yet 
here we are 2\1/2\ months later with no effort to move this bipartisan 
legislation forward toward enactment.
  In the meantime, the other body has considered an extension of the 
Internet tax moratorium for an additional 5 years. I supported the 
original Internet Nondiscrimination Act which created a 3-year 
moratorium on new taxes on the Internet while we considered the various 
ramifications of e-commerce taxation issues.
  That original moratorium does not expire until next October. Yet here 
we are 16 months in advance of that expiration preparing to consider an 
additional 5-year expansion. Not only that, but with this new 
legislation, we renege, frankly, on a promise made under the 1998 act 
which grandfathered existing State taxes on Internet services. That 
agreement was essential to securing the overwhelming support which S. 
442 ultimately received.
  I believe we should not be placing taxes on access to the Internet, 
but that is not the issue. The issue is the implementation of already 
existing sales tax responsibilities. Sales tax is a critical component 
of State and local revenues, especially in States such as South Dakota 
that do not have an income tax. More than half of our State budget 
derives from the sales tax. That is the money that goes to education,

[[Page S4938]]

crimefighting, and other essential services. This online-commerce 
loophole in sales tax collection results in an unfair situation for 
South Dakota merchants, and threatens the treasuries of State and local 
governments with the loss of millions of dollars in revenue. There is a 
great need for State tax laws to be applied to all sales regardless of 
whether the sales are made at a local store, over the Internet, or by 
any other means.
  H.R. 3709 does not foreclose the possibility of collecting sales tax 
on products purchased over the Internet. In fact, it is silent on this 
issue. That silence, however, is almost as dangerous to State and local 
government as an explicit rejection of equal treatment for brick and 
mortar stores. By filing this amendment to H.R. 3709, I want it made 
clear that I will oppose this legislation moving forward until it 
establishes a comprehensive review of Internet-related tax policy.
  I remain absolutely opposed to any new tax on the Internet. Internet 
usage ought to be encouaged and kept affordable. Public policy ought to 
promote tax-free Internet access, but it makes no sense that some sales 
are subject to sales tax while others are not. We need a level playing 
field for everyone. It is up to each individual State and municipality 
to decide for itself whether it wants to have a sales tax--but once 
that decision is made, it ought to apply uniformly to sales without 
regard to the particular technology utilized in making the sale. This 
correction must be considered in the context of any effort to extend 
the ongoing Internet tax moratorium.
  Although there are many pieces of critical legislation which would 
serve to highlight the tax fairness issues raised by H.R. 3709, I want 
to focus on S. 2097, the local-into-local television act.
  Under legislation we passed this past year, satellite companies are 
for the first time free to broadcast local network programming into 
local markets. That ability has already benefited thousands of viewers 
and promoted competition in the broadcast delivery industry. What S. 
2097 seeks to accomplish is to make that benefit a reality for 
Americans who live outside the largest 40 television markets.
  Like many of my colleagues, I represent a State, South Dakota, with 
rural viewers that should not be left out of the information age. South 
Dakota is one of the 16 States that do not have a single city among the 
top 70 markets. Sixteen States have no television markets within the 
top 70. Without this loan guarantee, markets such as Sioux Falls and 
Rapid City will never get local-into-local service, and rural South 
Dakotans will not have an opportunity to receive their local networks 
over the satellite signals.
  This proposal is more than just getting sports or entertainment 
programming over your local channels. It is a critical way to receive 
important local news, storm information, road reports, school closing 
information, and civic affairs information.
  Rural Americans need the same opportunity to access their local 
networks as do our urban friends. This legislation will provide that 
opportunity.
  We have worked very hard in the Banking Committee and on the floor to 
achieve strong bipartisan legislation. Senators Sarbanes, Baucus, 
Gramm, Burns, and others worked diligently to find the accommodations 
to satisfy everyone's concerns. We have a final product which will 
ultimately result in local-into-local broadcasting for rural America, 
and it does so in a fiscally responsible manner that limits the 
taxpayer exposure.
  The overwhelming vote in both the House and Senate demonstrates the 
soundness of this legislation. It is absolutely critical for the 
millions of Americans who live outside our major urban areas. It is the 
promised missing component of last year's Satellite Home Viewer 
Improvements Act.
  This issue has aroused the greatest level of constituent concern in 
many States in quite some time. S. 2097 provides a fiscally responsible 
and prudent response to the concerns raised by thousands of our 
constituents, protecting the taxpayer interests while at the same time 
helping to provide this service. I intend to offer this legislation to 
every vehicle possible this year until we have the opportunity to 
finish what we started and provide this essential service to all 
Americans.
  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. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________