Outlook for Legislation
Writing about legislation in the middle of a legislative session is like
predicting the weather three months in advance. If you're right, you can
claim the success, and if you're wrong, you hope that no one remembers!
The second session of the 103rd Congress begins with a full plate,
and, because it is a short session with several long recesses because of
elections, there will be even less time available than usual to move
through the legislative calendar. Any legislation that fails to pass
will have to be reintroduced in the next session of Congress. The agenda
contains the following matters:
* Spending disputes (New budget rules from last year's budget bill
froze the total budget for programs requiring annual appropriations.)
* Health care reform
* Crime control
* Welfare reform
* Campaign finance
* Foreign aid
* And, finally, telecommunications deregulation
The large number of high-priority items affects the outlook for
passage of telecommunications deregulation, because each of the listed
items competes for congressional attention. Recently, the Clinton
Administration created a new set of committees and working groups
through the Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF). This has
resulted in a busy web of activities including hearings, meetings, and
white paper recommendations that may affect legislation.
Telecommunications deregulation ranks high on the administration's
agenda, reflected by the widely publicized speeches1 by Vice President
Gore and Secretary Brown in December and January. In addition to
speeches, the administration has issued a white paper on Communications
Act reforms,2 with suggestions for changes and additions to current
House bills.
Other Activity
Recent moves by the cable and telecommunications industries are also
contributing to the complexity of the issue. The Regional Bell Operating
Companies (RBOCs) are actively positioning themselves for a competitive
world in which they will be challenged not only by cellular and cable
companies but also by other entities, such as public utility companies
and personal communications services.
AT&T's purchase of McCaw Cellular, the pending Bell Atlantic/TCI
merger, and other industry realignments will focus some attention on
antitrust issues. A prime example is Bell Atlantic's request on January
20 that the Justice Department lift restrictions limiting the RBOCs'
ability to provide long-distance services.
Major Legislation
There are many bills already in Congress dealing with telecommunications
and related issues. The major focus, however, will be on bills that
emerged in the previous session--Senate bill S. 1086, House bills H.R.
3626 and 3636, and the bill expected from Senator Hollings. These bills
would give relief to the telephone companies by allowing the companies
to provide video services.
The bills differ in their approaches to restrictions that are
incorporated, for instance, whether there must be separate subsidiaries
or whether the telephone companies can purchase cable systems in their
service areas. Each of the bills addresses the need to provide
interconnection and nondiscriminatory access. There also are
restrictions on the states' ability to regulate or restrict such
services. In each bill, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is
directed to take steps to preserve universal service and also to provide
access for the disabled. Other components of one or more bills are
electronic publishing, provision of long-distance services, and the
lifting of restrictions on manufacture of telecommunications equipment.
Administration Plans
The recent speeches and white paper have outlined the administration's
position. The Clinton Administration has indicated support for the major
thrust of the House and Senate telecommunications deregulation bills.
Suggested mechanisms for deregulation of the industry include the
following:
* The local telephone exchange would be opened up to competition
(from cable, long distance, electric utilities).
* RBOCs would be permitted to offer information services but must
have separate affiliates for electronic publishing.
* Telephone companies would be allowed to provide video programming
over new, open-access systems.
* There would be an obligation to allow interconnection of each
carrier's networks and to allow nondiscriminatory access to network
facilities, services, and functions.
The white paper was written with a primary focus on the provisions
of H.R. 3636--the Markey-Fields bill--which is being handled by the
House Energy and Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Finance and
Telecommunications. The House bill is on a fast track for approval and
there may be additional recommendations from the administration when the
Senate bill is taken up.
White paper recommendations include the following:
* Create safeguards to ensure that video channel capacity is
available on a nondiscriminatory basis.
* Prohibit telephone companies for five years from acquiring cable
systems located in their local exchange areas (except in certain cases
in rural areas where there may not be markets to support more than one
carrier).
* Authorize FCC studies of conditions for allowing acquisitions
earlier.
* Make sure that video offerings are subject to all the provisions
of common carrier regulation, not just rate regulation.
* Add a new section under the Communications Act of 1934, Title VII,
which would create a new category of regulation for broadband, two-way,
switched digital services; states would have only very limited
regulatory power over such services under this section.
* Address universal service as an explicit objective, and charge the
FCC and others to review the definition and approach to its support.
In addition, the Clinton Administration has stated its goal that by
the year 2000, all of the classrooms, libraries, hospitals, and clinics
in the United States will be connected to the National Information
Infrastructure (NII).
Hearings are scheduled in the House to address various aspects of
the administration's recommendations, and a bill could be passed in the
next few months if the current pace continues and consensus among
constituencies is maintained. In the Senate, the pace of S. 1086 will
pick up following House action and depending on competition from other
high-priority legislation, may lead to a compromise bill and passage for
presidential signature.
Next Steps for the Applications (Boucher Bill)
Remaining from the previous session of Congress is the unfinished
business of H.R. 1757 (High-Performance Computing and High-Speed
Networking Applications Act--the Boucher bill), which addressed the
National Research and Education Network and applications for the
Internet. H.R. 1757 passed the House, but S. 4 failed (barely) to get to
the floor for a vote in the Senate before recess. S. 4 (the National
Competitiveness Act) is an omnibus bill that addresses defense
conversion and other issues, including, in its Title VI, a thrust
similar to H.R. 1757.
S. 4 is expected to reach the floor in February and if passed, will
head to the conference committee. The Senate bill was the subject of
considerable debate over proposed restrictions that would have affected
network development. In November, the Clinton Administration assisted in
crafting a compromise to the restrictive provisions proposed. If the two
bills are combined through a House/Senate conference committee, it will
provide an opportunity for the administration to show leadership in the
development of applications in health care, education, manufacturing,
and libraries--but without any new money, of course!
Other Legislation
Many other issues and bills are already pending, including the
following.
S 473
DOE National Competitiveness on Technology Partnership.
Bennett Johnson
Implements a National Information Infrastructure Program for the Energy
Department by amending the HPC Act of 1991.
S 626
Electronic Library Act
Bob Kerrey
Establishes state-based electronic libraries, directing the National
Science Foundation in cooperation with other agencies to issue grants to
states.
S 1040
Technology for Education Act
Jeff Bingaman
Seeks to encourage the use of new technologies in education with
sections dealing with the Internet and other network activities.
S 1488
Computer Abuse Amendments
Joseph Biden
Redefines criminal provisions for computer abuse.
HR 2639
Telecommunications and Information Infrastructure and Public
Broadcasting Facilities Assistance
Edward J. Markey
Authorizes appropriations for the NII and National Telecommunications
and Information Administration grants.
HR 2875
DOE National Competitiveness on Technology Partnership
Bill Richards
Companion bill to S 473.
HR 3476
National Science and Technology Policy, Organization and Priorities
Rick Boucher
Amends underlying OSTP 3476 legislation to provide new functions and
also establishes president's committee of advisors on science and
technology, etc.
Conclusions
Although telecommunications deregulation remains a high priority, it is
competing for attention with many other national issues. If the powerful
constituencies involved can reach some consensus, it will increase the
chances that Congress will act. These constituencies include the RBOCs,
the long-distance companies, the cable companies, the entertainment
companies, and various public interest communities such as schools,
libraries, health care organizations, and higher education.
Higher education represents a major market for telecommunications
(probably the fourth-largest area after the federal government,
industry, and state governments), but its standing has not always been
recognized when competing for attention among the billion-dollar
industries with significant political clout. The changes that
deregulation will bring will have a profound effect on both the costs
and the opportunities of new services for higher education. The higher
education community needs to understand these changes and their
potential role in meeting its needs for increased productivity and new
services for supporting education and research.
Members of the community must make sure that their responsible
campus administrators put these issues on their priority lists and that
they communicate those priorities to their federal government relations
entities and national associations.3
Some of the broad policy questions that will require attention are:
* How can current regulatory activities, which are directed at
broadcasting models, be appropriately revised in order to reflect the
two-way, digital broadband communication model?
* Which checks and balances are appropriate to counter the
monopolistic tendencies that may arise in these new markets and could
significantly limit the public interest?
* Are there specific administrative and legislative actions needed
in this arena in order to support higher education goals?
* How will the concept of universal service be revised to reflect
the new competing environment? For instance, should subsidies/support go
directly to defined sectors of users (disabled, the poor, and others) to
provide them with access?
* How will the administration's goals for connections be
implemented?
Endnotes
1. Speeches were delivered by Secretary Brown and Vice President
Gore on December 21, 1993 (National Press Club, Washington, D); by Gore
on January 6, 1994 (Museum of Television and Radio, New York); and by
Brown on January 11, 1994 (Television Academy, Los Angeles).
2. "Administration White Paper on Communications Act Reforms,"
January 27, 1994.
3. Two excellent sources of information on the status of
legislation are Computing Research News--The News Journal of Computing
Research Association ([email protected] or 202 234-2111) and ALAWON--
American Library Association Newsline (Electronic Publication).
(Subscribe by sending "subscribe ALA-WO" [your e-mail address] to
[email protected].)
Robert G. Gillespie is an adviser on national policy dealing with
telecommunications and information infrastructure for Educom-Networking
and Telecommunications Task Force and other higher education and library
organizations.