[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 52 (Wednesday, May 1, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3583-S3586]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          DIGITAL BROADCASTING

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today is the 1st of May. It is significant 
in U.S. history for major technological achievements. On this day in 
1935, the Boulder Dam, later renamed for President Herbert Hoover, was 
completed. On May 1, 1947, radar for commercial and private aircraft 
was first demonstrated. On May 1, 1844, Samuel Morse sent the first 
telegraph message. All of these achievements represented significant 
technological milestones that have greatly benefited millions of 
Americans.
  May 1, 2002, was supposed to be a wonderful day that represented 
another technological milestone for American television viewers. Today 
is the deadline for all commercial television stations in the United 
States to be broadcasting a digital signal. Theoretically, consumers 
should now be able to receive a digital signal from each and every 
commercial broadcaster in the country. Unfortunately for consumers, a 
vast majority of broadcasters have missed today's deadline, leaving 
consumers' digital TV tuners with little more than static. In fact, 
according to recent figures from the FCC and the National Association 
of Broadcasters, over 1,011, or 77 percent, of commercial broadcasters 
have failed to meet the May 1 deadline. Moreover, 834 commercial 
stations filed waiver requests with the FCC seeking an extension to 
complete the construction of their digital facilities.
  The transition to digital television has been a grave disappointment 
for American consumers but not surprising to this Member. It is nothing 
short of a spectrum heist for American taxpayers. I will read a few 
headlines that recently appeared in newspapers across the country: The 
Boston Globe, ``Missed Signals: Many TV Stations Seen Lagging on 
Deadline to Offer High Definition.'' San Jose Mercury News: ``Static 
Blurs HDTV Transition. Industries Squabbling Stalls Digital 
Television.'' USA Today: ``Digital TV Revolution Yields Mostly White 
Noise.'' And finally, the most remarkable headline from Monday's New 
York Times: ``Most Commercial Broadcasters Will Miss Deadline For 
Digital Television.''
  This morning's USA Today states:

       Today was supposed to be a milestone in the grand 
     conversion to digital broadcast television. Instead it serves 
     as a marker for how poorly the transition is going . . . At 
     the current pace, broadcasters will be able to keep all of 
     their spectrum, digital and analogue, in perpetuity. That 
     means a substantial chunk will remain locked up in 
     broadcasters' hands instead of being put to more valuable 
     uses, such as for advanced cell phone services. Not only are 
     those needed, the spectrum also could be sold for billions, 
     aiding a deficit-laden U.S. Treasury.

  I ask unanimous consent that the editorial and other news items be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                     [From USA Today, May 1, 2002]

          Digital TV ``Revolution'' Yields Mostly White Noise

       Today was supposed to be a milestone in the grand 
     conversion to digital broadcast television. Instead it serves 
     as a marker for how poorly the transition is going.
       By now, every commercial broadcast station should have been 
     sending its signal digitally. With just a regular TV antenna 
     and a digital tuner, families were supposed to be getting 
     their favorite TV shows in crystal-clear pictures and 
     theater-quality sound.
       So far, though, the revolution is a dud. Only about 25% of 
     commercial stations offer a digital version of their 
     broadcast signal, according to a report from Congress' 
     General Accounting Office. And few programs are produced in 
     the highest-quality HDTV format. Little wonder that just 
     200,000 digital over-the-air tuners were sold last year, 
     compared with more than 22 million analog sets.
       This is all a far cry from the revolution the broadcast 
     industry promised six years ago. That's when Eddie Fritts, 
     president of the National Association of Broadcasters, 
     proclaimed that ``America will embrace digital TV quickly and 
     enthusiastically.''
       The hype, plus a heavy dose of big-money lobbying, 
     persuaded Congress to give $70-billion worth of extra 
     spectrum to the broadcast industry for free so it could 
     transmit digital and old-fashioned analog signals during the 
     transition. By 2006, 85% or more homes were to have made the 
     switch to digital. Then the old analog signal was to be 
     turned off, and broadcasters were to return the analog 
     spectrum to the taxpayers who financed their gift.
       At the current pace, though, broadcasters will be able to 
     keep all of their spectrum, digital and analog, in 
     perpetuity. That means a substantial chunk will remain locked 
     up in broadcasters' hands, instead of being put to more 
     valuable uses, such as for advanced cell phone services. Not 
     only are those needed, the spectrum also could be sold for 
     billions, aiding a deficit-laden U.S. Treasury.
       Confronted with this faltering transition, broadcasters are 
     casting blame in all directions: Cable companies don't carry 
     their digital offerings, which means a big chunk of potential 
     viewers can't get high-definition broadcasts. Only a tiny 
     fraction of TVs have digital tuners. Hollywood doesn't 
     produce enough digital content. The Federal Communications 
     Commission isn't issuing enough mandates.
       These complications have hampered the move to digital. But 
     at bottom, they are distractions designed to hide 
     broadcasters' unwillingness to fulfill the promise they made 
     in exchange for all of that free spectrum.
       Outside the broadcast industry, in fact, the conversion to 
     digital TV is moving along pretty smoothly. More than 15 
     million consumers subscribe to digital cable, and 17.5 
     million homes get digital TV via small home-satellite dishes. 
     HBO produces more high-definition digital content in any 
     given week than all of the broadcast networks combined. This 
     summer, the Discovery Channel will offer an all-high-
     definition service.
       Viewers snapped up 12 million DVD players last year alone 
     so they could watch digital movies. And digital TV monitors--
     which don't come with digital over-the-air tuners--are 
     selling briskly.
       Broadcasters were right. Consumers want the benefits of 
     digital TV. Now it's time for broadcasters to live up to 
     their bargain.
                                  ____


                 [From the Boston Globe, Apr. 26, 2002]

Missed Signals Many TV Stations Seen Lagging on Deadline To Offer High 
                               Definition

                           (By Peter J. Howe)

       Roughly three-quarters of second-tier television stations 
     in the United States are likely to miss next Wednesday's 
     deadline to begin transmitting at least some programming in 
     crystal-clear ``high-definition'' format, according to a 
     survey being released today by the General Accounting Office, 
     Congress's watchdog agency.
       Among the more than 800 US TV stations involved are 
     Boston's channels 38 and 56, which said yesterday they have 
     been given federal waivers to miss the May 1 deadline set by 
     Congress six years ago. Station executives said because of 
     technical challenges, it will probably be early summer at the 
     soonest before they start carrying programs in the high-
     definition format.
       US Representative Edward J. Markey of Malden, who is the 
     ranking Democrat on the House telecommunications subcommittee 
     and commissioned the GAO study, said last evening the fitful 
     progress shows the need for federal regulators to impose 
     ``clear deadlines and real punishments'' for HDTV laggards. 
     ``Some combination of the Federal Communications Commission 
     and Congress has to force a resolution of the conflicts which 
     exist amongst industries which have paralyzed the development 
     of digital TV,'' Markey said. ``We can no longer just stand 
     on the sidelines and allow the consumer to be deprived of the 
     benefits of this remarkable technology.''
       Six years ago, hoping to accelerate a shift many advocates 
     said would be even more radical than moving from black-and-
     white to color TV two generations ago, Congress enacted 
     legislation calling for all 1,600 US public and commercial TV 
     stations to move by 2006 to a format that provides much 
     clearer, all digital, wide-screen images more like a cinema 
     than TV.
       Images in HDTV are made up of nearly six times as many 
     pixels, or dots, as standard analog transmissions enabling 
     viewers to see details like individual blades of grass in a 
     baseball close-up or faces in a stadium crowd.
       The law called for 119 large-market TV stations affiliated 
     with ABC, CBS, NBC, and

[[Page S3584]]

     Fox to begin transmitting some HDTV content by May 1999, a 
     deadline that has largely been met--although the Sept. 11 
     terrorist destruction of the World Trade Center towers in New 
     York knocked five digital stations off the air there.
       The second in a series of deadlines, coming May 1, calls 
     for 1,121 stations in secondary and rural markets--and the 
     smaller stations in big markets, like Boston's WSBK-TV (Ch. 
     38) and WLVI-TV (Ch. 56)--to transmit at least some HDTV 
     programming.
       But the GAO found that 74 percent of those stations that 
     responded to a survey said they do not expect to meet the 
     deadline. They cited the huge expense of upgrading studios 
     and transmitters for HDTV, low consumer interest in buying 
     $1,000-plus TV sets that can bring in HDTV signals, and 
     practical issues such as a shortage of specially trained 
     crews that can climb up thousand-foot towers to install 
     new antennas.
       In Boston, a spokeswoman for WLVI-TV (Ch. 56), Kristen 
     Holgerson, said, ``We will probably be going on the air with 
     HDTV sometime in June, but there's no specific date.''
       Bob Hess, director of engineering and operations for the 
     CBS/Viacom-owned channels 4 and 38 in Boston and 28 in 
     Providence, said setting up high-definition transmitting 
     equipment for Channel 38 has been bogged down ``for some very 
     legitimate technical reasons.''
       Among them was that the FCC's random-allocation process led 
     to Channel 38 getting Channel 39 for its HDTV signal, 
     creating huge challenges for station technicians to figure 
     out how to install transmitters on their Needham Heights 
     tower that would not interfere with the existing analog 
     Channel 38.
       ``I'm expecting it to be on in early summer,'' Hess said, 
     but added that ``nothing is easy and nothing is fast.''
       Earlier this month, FCC chairman Michael K. Powell tried to 
     kick-start HDTV, using a speech at a broadcasters' convention 
     to encourage a purely voluntary effort to have television 
     networks show more HDTV programming, TV set makers produce 
     more sets that can get the signals, and cable television 
     networks--which roughly two-thirds of Americans use to watch 
     local channels--agree to add HDTV channels to their lineups.
       Markey, however, said the GAO study shows that Powell 
     cannot rely on a market approach to get the job done. He 
     noted that a third of TV stations surveyed by the GAO that 
     have gone to HDTV said they would not have met the deadline 
     without being ordered to by the government--and many said 
     without government pressure, it would be long after 2010 
     before a market developed.
       ``The FCC still is standing on the sidelines without a 
     clear program,'' Markey said.
       Dennis Wharton, a spokesman for the National Association of 
     Broadcasters, said while hundreds of stations will not make 
     the May 1 deadline, ``Most of them will be on the air within 
     three to 12 months. This is very short-term issue from the 
     broadcasting industry's perspective.''
       Wharton predicted that by next year, officials will be 
     focusing their ire on TV set makers' and cable TV 
     conglomerates' role in slowing HDTV adoption.
       By most estimates, fewer than 2 million US homes have been 
     willing to pay the exorbitant prices for HDTV sets that can 
     bring in special programming from the big networks only 30 to 
     40 hours a week. Fewer than 150,000 of the sets were sold in 
     the US during March, according to the Consumer Electronics 
     Association, despite the draw of CBS broadcasting college 
     basketball and the Masters Golf Tournament in high-definition 
     format.
       Among high-end TV buyers, however, ``the consumer interest 
     is unbelievable,'' said Jeffrey Stone, president of Tweeter, 
     the 158-store home electronics chain. He said in the winter 
     quarter, 91 percent of customers buying projection-screen TVs 
     opted to pay the $300-plus premium to get HDTV capability, 
     and 60 percent of conventional ``tube TV'' sales were HDTV 
     units.
       ``There's just no comparison'' to standard TV, Stone said, 
     recalling a basketball game he watched where ``you could 
     count the individual beads of sweat on Michael Jordan's head. 
     It looks more real than real life.''
                                  ____


            [From the San Jose Mercury News, Apr. 13, 2002]

  Static Blurs HDTV Transition; Industries' Squabbling Stalls Digital 
                               Television

                        (By Dawn C. Chmielewski)

       Federal regulators are working furiously to revive the 
     faltering transition to digital television, even as two-
     thirds of the nation's commercial stations say they will be 
     unable to meet a May 1 deadline to start digital broadcasts.
       Some 877 commercial stations have told the Federal 
     Communications Commission they would be unable--for 
     financial, legal or technical reasons--to start digital 
     broadcasts. That leaves half the nation's population, mostly 
     those in small cities or rural areas, without access to 
     crisp, digital television signals, federal regulators say.
       As broadcasters prepared for this week's National 
     Association of Broadcasters (NAB) convention in Las Vegas, 
     FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell outlined a series of voluntary 
     measures for broadcasters, television manufacturers, cable 
     companies and home satellite providers to avert what he once 
     described as ``a potential train wreck.'' The recommendations 
     triggered a fresh round of finger pointing, as each industry 
     blamed the other for the halting transition to digital TV. 
     Powell called on the four major broadcast networks, together 
     with cable networks HBO and Showtime, to broadcast half of 
     this fall's prime-time lineup in cinematic high-definition TV 
     or offer digital broadcasts with enhanced features, such as 
     interactivity. High-definition TV offers near-cinematic 
     picture quality while digital broadcasts are equivalent to 
     what satellite TV subscribers currently receive.
       By January, Powell proposed, network-affiliated stations in 
     the nation's 100 largest markets would broadcast an enhanced 
     digital signal to the 2.5 million people who own digital TV 
     sets. At the same time, cable and satellite operators must 
     begin carrying the digital programming.
       TV manufacturers, for their part, must begin to make 
     television sets with built-in tuners to receive the over-the-
     air digital broadcasts. Only 20 of the more than 300 models 
     of digital TV sets manufactured currently come with such 
     integrated receivers. For the vast majority of consumers, the 
     only way to currently receive digital signals over the air is 
     with a separate set-top receiver and antenna.
       ``We embrace the principles embodied in the Powell plan. We 
     encourage our friends in allied industries to do likewise,'' 
     said Edward O. Fritts, president and chief executive of the 
     National Association of Broadcasters, in the opening address 
     to the convention. ``This transition is far too important to 
     consumers to risk further delay.''
       Industry trade groups applauded Powell for trying to spur 
     the moribund digital TV transition, even as they pointed to 
     obstacles that would make it difficult to comply with his 
     recommendations. The broadcasters say 274 stations already 
     beam digital signals into the nation's largest cities. But 
     the owners of small-market stations, such as San Jose's KKPX 
     (Ch. 65), see little point in investing a reported $1 million 
     to $2 million on the digital conversion, when fewer than a 
     half-million consumers nationwide own the set-top boxes and 
     antennas needed to tune in the digital broadcasts.
       HDTV is widely regarded as the driving force that will 
     entice consumers to make the migration to digital. But the 
     majority of cable systems, which provide television 
     programming to 67 percent of American households, still don't 
     carry the networks' high-definition broadcasts of events like 
     the Winter Olympics or the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament 
     in fewer than a dozen markets.
       So station owners feel little urgency to flip the digital 
     switch.
       ``Most people don't have digital TV,'' said Nancy Udell, a 
     spokeswoman for KKPX parent Paxson Communications. The 
     station received an FCC extension to the May 1 deadline, 
     buying it time to explore a lower-cost method of 
     simultaneously transmitting the digital signal alongside its 
     analog broadcasts.
       The National Cable and Telecommunications Association 
     (NCTA), meanwhile, says its member services will carry high-
     definition television network programming when consumers 
     demand it--or competition from digital satellite services 
     such as EchoStar or DirecTV compels it. Indeed, they already 
     carry high-definition HBO and Showtime channels in 280 cities 
     across the country
       ``We've said all along, when the demand is there, this will 
     take care of itself,'' said Marc O. Smith, spokesman for the 
     NCTA.
       The consumer electronics manufacturers, meanwhile, say 
     they're unable to build cable-ready sets, because the cable 
     industry has yet to settle on a standard for digital TV 
     reception. And the set of working specifications developed by 
     the industry's research arm, CableLabs, contain content 
     protection that would give Hollywood studios the power to 
     halt home recording or, alternatively, blur the picture 
     resolution.
       ``No manufacturer has been stupid enough to sign the 
     agreement yet,'' said Bob Perry, marketing vice president for 
     Mitsubishi Consumer Electronics America, the nation's leading 
     maker of projection televisions.
       The Gordian knot of digital television may ultimately be 
     unraveled in the halls of Congress. Later this month, the 
     Consumer Electronics Association and legislators will convene 
     a summit to discuss strategy for speeding the rollout.
                                  ____


                [From the New York Times, Apr. 29, 2002]

  Media; Most Commercial Broadcasters Will Miss Deadline for Digital 
                               Television

                          (By Stephen Labaton)

       Another milestone in the nation's tortured transition to 
     digital television is about to be missed. Almost three-
     quarters of the commercial broadcasters that were supposed to 
     be offering a digital signal by Wednesday will fail to make 
     the deadline.
       The delay is a further indication that the federally 
     mandated transition to digital broadcasting will take longer 
     than the planners had expected in the mid-1990's. But the 
     missed deadline comes as no surprise. Hundreds of stations 
     have been filing requests for extensions recently, citing a 
     variety of financial and technical reasons. A report issued 
     last week by the General Accounting Office found that 74 
     percent of the stations that were supposed to be emitting a 
     digital signal by the May 1 regulatory deadline would be 
     unable to do so. The report said most of the delinquent 
     stations had cited the high cost of new technology. For 
     stations in transition, the expenses averaged 63 percent of 
     annual revenue for a technology that adds nothing discernible 
     to the bottom line. The

[[Page S3585]]

     report also noted the relatively low consumer interest caused 
     by the high prices of digital TV sets and a host of technical 
     issues like tower constructions.
       Despite the difficulties, 95 percent of the major network 
     affiliates in the top 30 markets are already offering digital 
     broadcasting, and their signals reach about half of the 
     population. But the failure of the smaller broadcasters is 
     symbolic of a much larger nagging problem of aligning the 
     technical and financial interests of a handful of 
     industries--broadcasters, programmers, cable operators and 
     electronic equipment makers--to make digital television 
     accessible at affordable prices to consumers.
       ``It's a very complicated transition with lots of moving 
     parts,'' said Rick Chessen, the chairman of a regulatory task 
     force supervising the government's oversight of the 
     conversion to digital television.
       Digital television, which Congress and policy makers have 
     been promoting the last six years, offers crisper images and 
     sound, reduced interference and the prospect of viewers 
     communicating through the set much the way they now do on the 
     Internet. But transforming TV from analog to digital has 
     public-policy significance beyond pretty pictures and greater 
     viewer participation.
       Policy makers of varying approaches agree that, by using a 
     far smaller sliver of the electronic spectrum, digital 
     significantly frees the airwaves for more productive use by 
     other industries, including wireless communications, whose 
     proponents are clamoring for more licenses. Once digital 
     penetrates 85 percent of the nation's viewing market, the law 
     requires broadcasters to surrender their analog-spectrum 
     licenses back to the government to be reissued to other 
     commercial ventures at auction. As a result, analysts and 
     policy makers agree that the longer the digital 
     transition, the greater the economic overhang.
       ``Spectrum is critical for us to have economic growth,'' 
     said Blair Levin, a former top official at the Federal 
     Communications Commission who is a regulatory analyst at Legg 
     Mason. ``To the extent it is tied up, it represents a huge 
     drag on the economy.''
       The rollout of digital TV has stalled over many 
     uncertainties about how to do so profitably. Broadcasters, 
     particularly smaller ones, see little or no financial benefit 
     yet in offering digital signals. Consumers cannot find high-
     definition television sets at affordable prices. Programmers 
     have moved slowly in offering shows of digital quality. Cable 
     operators have only just begun, in small pockets, to transmit 
     digital signals.
       Hoping to break the logjam, Michael K. Powell, the F.C.C. 
     chairman, has called for the major industrial players to 
     impose their own voluntary deadlines.
       ``You will get on this train in the right way, or it will 
     run you over,'' he said this month at the annual conference 
     of the National Association of Broadcasters.
       Mr. Powell urged the four major networks and other major 
     programmers to digitally broadcast at least half of their 
     prime-time shows by this fall. He asked cable and satellite 
     companies to carry some digital programs by the beginning of 
     next year at no extra cost to subscribers. And he proposed 
     deadlines over the next four years for television makers to 
     increase their production of sets that include digital 
     tuners.
       Others long engaged in the debate say that Mr. Powell's 
     proposal is not enough, and that in some instances it asks 
     industry players to do little more than they had previously 
     pledged. While there is no momentum on Capital Hill for the 
     imposition of sanctions on tardy industry players or 
     subsidies to encourage faster transition, some lawmakers are 
     calling for legislation to prod a faster conversion.
       ``Our digital policy is a mess, and in the absence of the 
     federal government intervening with a comprehensive policy, 
     the American consumer is unlikely to ever receive the full 
     benefits of the digital revolution,'' said Representative 
     Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, who is ranking 
     Democrat on a House subcommittee on telecommunications. 
     ``Voluntary approaches don't work. A voluntary policy is what 
     got us to today's mess. What we've wound up with now is the 
     broadcast industry and cable industry engaged in spectrum 
     hostage-taking with no end in sight, and no relief for the 
     benefit of consumers.''
       Federal rules required the 119 largest network affiliates 
     to begin transmitting some digital programs by May 1999. That 
     deadline has largely been met.
       By Wednesday, 1,121 smaller stations were supposed to be in 
     compliance, but nearly three-quarters will fail to meet the 
     deadline. But industry officials said that they expected most 
     of the broadcasters to be in compliance by the end of the 
     year.
       ``We consider this a short-term issue affecting mostly 
     small and medium market broadcasters,'' said Dennis Wharton, 
     a spokesman for the National Association of Broadcasters.

  Mr. McCAIN. Broadcasters have not only missed today's deadline but 
they have broken their promise to Congress and American consumers. In 
testimony before the Commerce Committee in 1997, the National 
Association of Broadcasters stated:

       We agreed to an aggressive rollout for this new technology 
     . . . Broadcasters have made a compact with Congress 
     concerning high definition television. We will meet our 
     commitments.

  I did not believe that at the time, and I know it is not true now. 
This is a $70 billion rip-off on the part of the National Association 
of Broadcasters, pure and simple. Today it is clear that three-quarters 
of those broadcasters have not met their commitments, and their failure 
to do so is slowing the transition to digital television. A slow 
transition affects Americans not only as consumers but also as 
taxpayers.
  Broadcasters were given $70 billion in spectrum to facilitate the 
transition on the condition that they return it when the transition is 
complete. By failing to meet today's deadline, broadcasters continue to 
squat on the taxpayers' valuable resource.
  While I am generally disappointed and frustrated by the broadcasters' 
failure to live up to their promises, I recognize some television 
networks are contributing to the transition. For example, CBS has been 
one of the leaders in providing digital content to consumers. They 
broadcast a large majority of their prime time schedule in high 
definition--approximately 16 hours a week. In addition, ABC is 
currently broadcasting all of their scripted prime time programming in 
high definition. Providing compelling content to consumers is an 
important component to the DTV transition. The more stations that are 
DTV capable and are broadcasting in high definition, the more consumers 
will migrate to this new technology and purchase products that allow 
them to view enhanced programming.
  I believe broadcasters, as beneficiaries of this great American 
spectrum rip-off, bear heightened responsibility for facilitating the 
DTV transition. I recognize that if even the broadcasters were to meet 
their commitments, the transition would not necessarily be complete. 
Digital broadcast is one cylinder of the engine needed to drive the 
transition. Many other issues still remain unsolved, and I do not 
underestimate the amount of work that needs to be done. Michael Powell, 
chairman of the FCC, has recognized this. In what I believe is a step 
in the right direction, Chairman Powell has advanced a proposal that 
incorporates provisions for all of the industries involved with the DTV 
transition and asks for voluntary cooperation to accelerate the 
transition.
  Chairman Powell has called for the top four networks to provide DTV 
programming during at least 50 percent of their prime time schedule 
beginning in the 2002-2003 season and has asked DTV affiliates of the 
top four networks in major markets to obtain and install the equipment 
necessary to broadcast a digital signal and inform viewers that digital 
content is being broadcast.
  The proposal also calls on cable operators with 750 megahertz systems 
or higher to offer to carry, at no cost, the signals of up to five 
broadcast or other digital programming services. Additionally, the 
proposal asks the direct broadcast satellite industry to carry the 
signals of up to five digital programming services that are providing 
DTV programming during at least 50 percent of their prime time 
schedule.
  Finally, the proposal calls on the equipment manufacturers to include 
over-the-air DTV tuners in new broadcast television receivers between 
2004 and 2006. I understand that certain industry representatives, 
including broadcast networks and earlier today the cable industry, have 
expressed a general willingness to answer Chairman Powell's call. I 
think this is also a step in the right direction. I am hopeful these 
commitments will lead to results. Unfortunately, the last commitments 
obviously did not.

  Make no mistake, I continue to be a firm believer in market forces, 
which is why I believe this voluntary proposal is an appropriate step 
at this time. We must be mindful, however, that valuable public 
resources are at stake. Should the transition continue to be delayed, 
alternative measures will need to be taken in order to reclaim the 
spectrum for which so many other productive uses can be found and which 
rightfully belongs to the American taxpayers.
  I believe, therefore, the Congress needs to be prepared to intervene, 
if necessary, to protect the taxpayers of this country. If significant 
progress is not made in the DTV transition, then I will introduce 
legislation that will not be voluntary. Codifying Chairman Powell's 
voluntary proposal may be the mildest measure we should consider.

[[Page S3586]]

  Let me emphasize the importance of this point. Significant progress 
needs to be made on the DTV transition. If progress continues to stall, 
then perhaps a more aggressive approach such as reclaiming the spectrum 
from the broadcasters beginning January 1, 2007, will be required.
  In closing, I realize this transition has not been easy for all the 
industries involved. Some of the industries have made intensive 
efforts, devoting significant time and resources to make DTV a reality, 
but many difficult issues surrounding the DTV transition still remain.
  During a 1998 Commerce Committee hearing on DTV transition, I stated 
I would not suggest the Government now ought to step up and immerse 
itself in micromanaging every piece of this process. While I still 
believe the Government is not good at micromanaging, I believe the hour 
is nearing when the Government should step in and find solutions to the 
mess we helped create. More importantly, I believe Congress has a duty 
to protect the taxpayers of this country and reclaim spectrum so it may 
be put to its best use.
  I will finish with one final observation: For the most part, the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996 has failed to live up to its promises to 
consumers. I believe its failures can teach us a valuable lesson while 
we watch many of the same industries involved in the passage of the act 
grapple with conversion to DTV.
  The lesson we should have learned from the failure of the 1996 
Telecom Act is that the interests of major telecommunications companies 
and average American consumers are not the same. Where the interests of 
the industries and the interests of the consumers diverge, Congress 
must assure that the consumers come first. The failures of the 
Telecommunications Act show what happens when Congress first fails to 
see where the interests of industries are incompatible with the 
interests of consumers, and then fails to act once it does. I intend 
not to let this happen and will move forward with legislation should 
progress not be made in the coming months.
  I say again, when we gave away $70 billion to the broadcasters, I 
knew at the time they would never meet this time schedule. It was a 
dirty little secret. They have not met it.
  The Senator from New Jersey is on the floor. We tried to get some 
free television time for candidates. They certainly could not afford 
that. They are not acting in the public interest, and it is time they 
started acting in the public interest. There is no more powerful lobby 
in this town than the National Association of Broadcasters, and abuses 
have never been greater.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous unanimous consent 
agreement, the Senator from Minnesota is recognized for a period of up 
to 10 minutes.
  Mr. REID. If I could ask my friend to yield for a unanimous consent 
request, I ask unanimous consent that following the statement of the 
Senator from Minnesota, Senator Torricelli be recognized for 30 minutes 
as in morning business, and following that, Senator Lott or his 
designee be recognized for up to 40 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Minnesota.

                          ____________________