Bell companies call for new cable laws
Recently, the Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs), specifically New York-based Verizon and San Antonio-based SBC Communications, have begun rebuilding their networks so they can provide local video service. But instead of abiding by the current rules that govern cable TV companies and other multichannel video providers, the phone companies are campaigning for changes in state and federal laws. The alterations would allow the phone companies to choose the neighborhoods where they would provide service and take away local governments’ powers to manage right-of-way access by video service providers.
The current federal framework, which was established in 1984, grants states the authority to regulate the video marketplace. Most states — except small ones, such as Rhode Island — then transfer that authority to the local governments, which are referred to as local franchising authorities. Video providers must obtain franchises from those local authorities to ensure that rights of way are properly maintained and that social obligations are met. The franchises, for instance, require public and government access channels, customer service standards, emergency alert services and free hookup for schools and libraries.
Proponents of local franchises contend that they help maintain rights of way, which are local assets most effectively managed at the local level. They also require video providers to offer services throughout the community, not just to affluent areas where the return on investment is highest. At a congressional hearing in April 2005, U.S. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., the ranking Democrat on the House Telecommunications and Internet subcommittee, said, “It is particularly troubling that SBC and Verizon have deployment plans that skip over and avoid the very communities in their service territories which could most benefit from an affordable alternative in the marketplace.”
The RBOCs, however, want to provide local video service using their own existing infrastructure and side step franchise requirements, which they argue are too time-consuming and difficult, and impede their ability to deploy new service. Part of SBC’s and Verizon’s lobbying efforts in recent months has been to move franchising to the state or federal level. In Texas, SBC and Verizon were successful in lobbying for a bill that allows statewide, rather than local, franchising. Efforts to enact the legislation failed in the regular session but will again be debated in a second special session called by Gov. Rick Perry to deal with the issue, along with school financing. Similar measures to change the local video franchising process are being considered in other states, such as California and New Jersey.
On the federal level, Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., has proposed legislation that would allow the RBOCs to enter the multichannel video marketplace without having to meet most local franchising obligations. At the end of July, Senate Commerce Technology Subcommittee Chairman John Ensign, R-Nev., introduced a bill that would eliminate local cable franchising altogether. In addition, House and Energy Commerce Committee Vice Chairman Charles Pickering, R-Miss., and Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Ark., have said they support a national franchising arrangement.
Telecommunications observers expect the issue to be hotly contested over the rest of the year, and possibly into 2006. Organizations representing local governments, such as the Washington-based National League of Cities, are campaigning against the bills at the congressional level and urging constituents to do the same.
— Submitted by the Washington-based National Cable and Telecommunications Association.
Recently proposed legislation
Sen. John Ensign’s bill (Broadband Investment and Consumer Choice Act) would:
- eliminate all existing local franchise agreements
- eliminate rate regulation of telephone and video service providers
- make the Federal Communications Commission the arbitrator of disputes over franchise fees
- limit the number of required public, educational and government public access channels to four
SOURCE: Washington-based National League of Cities, July 2005