[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 15]
[Senate]
[Pages 20189-20190]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             A REAL THREAT TO SATELLITE TELEVISION SERVICE

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, in 1998 and 1999 over 2 million families 
were faced with the prospect of losing the ability to receive one or 
more of their satellite television network stations. Back then, 
Congress acted and not only protected access to those stations but also 
expanded consumer opportunities to receive more programming options.
  This time around the story may not have such a happy ending. As we 
near the end of the session, I grow more concerned that Congress will 
not have time to pass a reauthorization of the Satellite Home Viewer 
Act. This is especially disappointing because many members of the other 
body and many Senators have worked diligently to craft legislative 
language that would be a boon to public television, the satellite 
industry, the movie, music and television industries, and to satellite 
dish owners throughout America.
  Indeed, families who own satellite dishes may end up being the big 
losers if provisions of that act are not extended. Many midwestern and 
Rocky Mountain States have vast areas where satellite dish owners 
receive imported network stations such as ABC, NBC, CBS or Fox. 
Thousands of these families do not have any other choices. They do not 
have access to TV stations over-the-air because of mountain terrain or 
distance from the broadcast towers. They do not have access to cable 
because of the rough terrain or the lack of population density which 
makes it economically impossible for cable companies to invest. Without 
access to network stations via satellite, over-the-air, or cable those 
families will no longer be able to receive national news programming or 
other network TV programming.
  If Congress does not reauthorize provisions of current law by 
December 31, 2004, hundreds of thousands of households will lose 
satellite access to network TV stations. Since information about 
subscribers is proprietary it is difficult for me to tell you exactly 
how many families will be affected by this, but I assure you it is not 
a small number.
  The Senate Judiciary Committee got its job done in June. We reported 
a great bill out of Committee without a single amendment and without a 
single nay vote. That bill does far more than just protect satellite 
dish owners from losing signals. At the time I pointed out that the new 
satellite bill ``protects subscribers in every State, expands viewing 
choices for most dish owners, promotes access to local programming, and 
increases direct, head-to-head, competition between cable and satellite 
providers.''
  I continued by saying that, ``easily, this bill will benefit 21 
million satellite television dish owners throughout the nation, and I 
am happy to note that over 85,000 of those subscribers are in 
Vermont.''
  The Senate and House Judiciary Committee-reported bills go far beyond 
protecting what current subscribers receive. The bills allow additional 
programming via satellite through adoption of the so-call 
``significantly viewed'' test now used for cable, but not satellite 
subscribers. That test means that, in general, if a person in a cable 
service area that historically received over-the-air TV reception from 
``nearby'' stations outside that area, those cable operators could 
offer those station signals in that person's cable

[[Page 20190]]

service area. In other words, if you were in an area in which most 
families in the past had received TV signals using a regular roof-top 
antenna then you could be offered that same signal TV via cable. By 
having similar rules, satellite carriers will be able to directly 
compete with cable providers who already operate under the 
significantly viewed test. This gives home dish owners more choices of 
programming.
  In the past, Congress got the job done. Congress worked well together 
in 1998 and 1999 when we developed a major satellite law that 
transformed the industry by allowing local television stations to be 
carried by satellite and beamed back down to the local communities 
served by those stations. This marked the first time that thousands of 
TV owners were able to get the full complement of local network 
stations. In 1997 we found a way to avoid cutoffs of satellite TV 
service to millions of homes and to protect the local affiliate 
broadcast system. The following year we forged an alliance behind a 
strong satellite bill to permit local stations to be offered by 
satellite, thus increasing competition between cable and satellite 
providers.
  We also worked with the Public Broadcasting System so they could 
offer a national feed as they transitioned to having their local 
programming beamed up to satellites and then beamed back down to much 
larger audiences.
  Because of those efforts, in Vermont and most other States, dish 
owners are able to watch their local stations instead of getting 
signals from distant stations. Such a service allows television 
watchers to be more easily connected to their communities as well as 
providing access to necessary emergency signals, news and broadcasts.
  I hope we are able to work together to finish this important 
satellite television bill in the few remaining days of this Congress.

                          ____________________