[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 38 (Wednesday, March 24, 2004)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E442]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  THE TELEVISION CONSUMER FREEDOM ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. RON PAUL

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, March 24, 2004

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Television Consumer 
Freedom Act, legislation repealing regulations that interfere with a 
consumer's ability to obtain desired television programming. The 
Television Consumer Freedom Act also repeals federal regulations that 
would increase the cost of a television.
  My office has received numerous calls from rural satellite and cable 
TV customers who are upset because their satellite or cable service 
providers have informed them that they will lose access to certain 
network and cable programming. The reason my constituents cannot obtain 
their desired satellite and cable services is that the satellite and 
cable ``marketplace'' is fraught with government interventionism at 
every level. Local governments have historically granted cable 
companies franchises of monopoly privilege. Government has previously 
intervened to invalidate ``exclusive dealings'' contracts between 
private parties, namely cable service providers and program creators, 
and has most recently imposed price controls. The Library of Congress 
has even been delegated the power to determine prices at which program 
suppliers must make their programs available to cable and satellite 
programming service providers.
  It is, of course, within the constitutionally enumerated powers of 
Congress to ``promote the progress of Science and Useful Arts by 
securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the Exclusive Right 
to their respective Writings and Discoveries.'' However, operating a 
clearing-house for the subsequent transfer of such property rights in 
the name of setting a just price or ``instilling competition'' via 
``central planning'' seems to be neither economically prudent nor 
justifiable under this enumerated power. This process is one best 
reserved to the competitive marketplace.
  It is impossible for the government to set the just price for 
satellite programming. Over regulation of the cable industry has 
resulted in competition among service providers for government 
privilege rather than free market competition among providers to offer 
a better product at a lower price. While federal regulation does leave 
satellite programming service providers free to bypass the governmental 
royalty distribution scheme and negotiate directly with owners of 
programming for program rights, there is a federal prohibition on 
satellite service providers making local network affiliates' programs 
available to nearby satellite subscribers. This bill repeals that 
federal prohibition so satellite service providers may freely negotiate 
with program owners for programming desired by satellite service 
subscribers. Technology is now available by which viewers could view 
network programs via satellite as presented by their nearest network 
affiliate. This market-generated technology will remove a major 
stumbling block to negotiations that should currently be taking place 
between network program owners and satellite service providers.
  This bill also repeals federal laws that force cable companies to 
carry certain programs. These federal ``must carry'' mandates deny 
cable companies the ability to provide the programming their customers' 
desire. Decisions about what programming to carry on a cable system 
should be made by consumers, not federal bureaucrats.

  The Television Consumer Freedom Act also repeals federal regulations 
that mandate that all TVs sold in the United States contain ``digital 
technology.'' In complete disregard of all free market and 
constitutional principles, the FCC actually plans to forbid consumers 
from buying TVs, after 2006 that are not equipped to carry digital 
broadcasts. According to Stephen Moore of the CATO Institute, this 
could raise the price of a TV by as much as $250 dollars. While some 
television manufactures and broadcasters may believe they will benefit 
from this government-imposed price increase, they will actually lose 
business as consumers refrain from purchasing new TVs because of the 
government mandated price increase.
  Mr. Speaker, the federal government should not interfere with a 
consumer's ability to purchase services such as satellite or cable 
television in the free market. I therefore urge my colleagues to take a 
step toward restoring freedom by cosponsoring my Television Consumer 
Freedom Act.

                          ____________________