Benton RSS Feed
to Meet April 7, 2006
will meet in telephonic session Friday, April 7, 2006, from 3:00 - 5:30 pm ET.
On the draft agenda:
- Discussion of the Office of the Ombudsmen
- Review of General Principles and Respective Responsibilities of the Board, the Chair, and the President
- Review of Proposed Revisions to the Code of Ethics for Directors
- Review of Policies (Contracts; "Whistleblower"/Non-Retaliation Policy; Investigation-Related Records Policy; and Open Meetings Procedures)
The public may attend and observe this meeting in the Blair-Killian Board Room of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting
March 30, 2006
On March 27, 2006, House Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-TX) released a new version of a bill he hopes will be the vehicle for updating the country’s communications law. The would, in part, prevent regulations from slowing the entry of new competitors into the pay-TV services market. Specifically, the bill would 1) create a nationwide approval process for pay-TV services; 2) require Internet-based telephone services to offer 9-1-1 capabilities while ensuring Internet telephone providers have access to all necessary 9-1-1 infrastructure and technology; 3) clarify the FCC authority to prevent Internet service providers from blocking or degrading any content or applications delivered over the public Internet; 4) preserve municipalities’ right to collect up to a five percent fee from pay-TV providers; and 5) allow cities and towns to develop their own broadband networks.
With the support of House Republican leaders including House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL), if any major telecommunication reform bill passes through the House during this Congress, it is likely to be this one. Follow the link below for a summary of the 34-page bill as well as a look at what might be missing from this effort to reform US telecom policy.
Communications, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006
March 30, 2006
The House Commerce Committee will consider today a telecom reform bill drafted by committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-TX) and he said "the odds are 2 to 1 that the president is going to sign a bill this year." “Obviously, it’s going to be modified and amended, but I think it has real power and I believe the president will sign a version very close to this bill sometime this calendar year,†Rep Barton said in a conference call with reporters.
http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=node/1928
March 30, 2006
BARTON: BUSH WILL SIGN '06 TELECOM BILL
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
The House Commerce Committee will consider today a telecom reform bill drafted by committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-TX) and he said "the odds are 2 to 1 that the president is going to sign a bill this year." “Obviously, it’s going to be modified and amended, but I think it has real power and I believe the president will sign a version very close to this bill sometime this calendar year,†Rep Barton said in a conference call with reporters. Rep Barton said that House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who publicly supports the bill, had cleared floor time for the vote sometime in May or June. House Telecommunications Subcommittee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said that they were "very close" to getting both the cable and telco sides to sign off on the bill, which creates a national franchising system for both new entrants like telcos and incumbent cable systems. During the same talk with reporters, Rep Barton indicated that a proposed amendment to his bill that would overhaul retransmission consent is unlikely to pass the Commerce Committee. He urged the amendment's author, Rep Nathan Deal (R-GA) not to offer the amendment. Retransmission consent refers to the ability of local TV stations to demand compensation in exchange for cable carriage. Although many cable companies complain that ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox are abusing the process, the programming giants counter that they are playing fair and that the deals are market-driven.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6320367.html?display=Breaking+News
* Telecom Bill? Bet on It, Says Barton
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6320349?display=Breaking+News
* Barton: Amendment Won't Pass
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6320354.html?display=Breaking+News
*** There's a House Commerce Committee hearing today to consider the Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006 (see http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/Hearings/03302006hearing1823/hearing...). To learn more about the legislation see Benton's Telecom Legislation Tracker (http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=node/1882) ***
March 30, 2006
BARTON REJECTS NET NEUTRALITY CONCERNS
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Anne Broache]
House Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-TX) defended his decision to include limited obligations related to Net neutrality for broadband providers in the latest version of a much-anticipated bill released Monday. "Before we get too far down the road, I want to let the market kind of sort itself out, and I'm not convinced that we really have a problem with Net neutrality," Rep Barton said in a conference call with reporters. "I know the average congressman doesn't know what the term means, and...experts disagree on what the term means." Telecommunications and cable executives say they deserve the right to create a tiered Internet system that would require big bandwidth hogs like Google or Yahoo to pay more for their access in order to recoup the substantial costs they face in launching new services, particularly video. But many content providers that use the broadband providers' pipes argue that plans for such a "fast lane" pose a threat to the Internet's open architecture and could elevate prices for consumers. Consumer groups and Internet companies such as Microsoft, Google and Yahoo have charged that the House's new bill doesn't go far enough to protect surfers from such ills. Chairman Barton dismissed their concerns. "If I'm a Yahoo or an Amazon.com and I'm investing hundreds of millions of dollars into my service, I'm willing to invest 10 cents a video to get it to my customers," he said. The committee's proposal "strikes the right posture" in the debate because it "explicitly" gives the Federal Communications Commission the authority to enforce its own set of broadband principles outlined last August, Rep Barton said. He suggested that enforcing suspected Net neutrality violations on a case-by-case basis is the best way to go until a clearer picture emerges about the reality of the problem. "The market is going to make it a moot issue," he said. "I don't think we'll be gnashing our teeth over Net neutrality two to three years from now."
http://news.com.com/Politico+rejects+Net+neutrality+concerns/2100-1034_3...
* The Barton Bill -- Throwing Out the Baby and the Bathwater
http://www.saschameinrath.com/2006mar28the_barton_bill_throwing_out_the_...
** Your Guide to Network Neutrality **
http://www.hearusnow.org/internet/27/
Barton Rejects Net Neutrality Concerns
March 30, 2006
DINGELL QUIZZES AT&T ON FRANCHISE LAW
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich) is questioning whether AT&T needs a federal video-franchising law when the company is insisting that its Project Lightspeed video service relies on a technology exempt from all traditional cable rules, including local franchising. Rep Dingell, the top Democrat on the House Commerce Committee, expressed his concerns in a letter Wednesday to AT&T Chairman and CEO Edward Whitacre. Rep Dingell is expected to attend a House subcommittee hearing Thursday on the franchising bill. “It is unclear why it makes sense for the committee on Energy and Commerce to consider legislation to streamline the cable-franchise process when companies can define themselves out of the process,†Rep Dingell wrote. “The committee clearly needs to receive information sufficient to evaluate whether the Communications Act definitions should be updated so that companies that offer IP-video services can benefit from the national cable franchising.â€
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6320114.html?display=Breaking+News
* Project Lights Out
[SOURCE: Bunnie Riedel]
[Commentary] Riedel wonders why AT&T has to completely disintegrate local government franchising so they can roll out a product that is already obsolete before they've thrown their first switch?
www.riedelcommunications.blogspot.com
* AT&T COO: Lightspeed Capacity Not an Issue
http://www.ipdemocracy.com/archives/001347att_coo_lightspeed_capacity_no...
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6320114.html?display=Breaking%20News
March 30, 2006
TELCO, CABLE WORLDS APART ON FRANCHISES
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The Bush Administration, the FCC, and Congress are essentially on the same page that some video franchise reform is needed to help spur price and service competition to cable and the roll-out of broadband service. Even the cable industry agrees on reform, so long as it is fair to both sides. The FCC has been considering how to streamline the franchising process to speed the roll-out of broadband. While pushing for new franchise legislation and regulation, the telephone industry is looking for a national franchising process that would allow it to bypass the local franchising negotiations. The telcos potentially have two avenues for national franchise regulatory relief. The FCC could decide to exercise its authority under the 1992 Cable Act if it concluded LFA's were being unreasonable in their demands and unduly delaying the process, or Congress could mandate a national franchising scheme as part of its planned rewrite of the 1996 Telecommunications Act.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6320032?display=Breaking+News
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6320032?display=Breaking%20News
March 30, 2006
VERIZON BROADBAND DEREGULATION CONTESTED BY RIVALS
[SOURCE: Reuters]
Last week, the Federal Communications Commission exempted Verizon from scores of regulations for its high-capacity data business services, including requirements that it connect to other networks and negotiate deals with competitors. Now Comptel, which represents companies that compete against Verizon, and Sprint Nextel have asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to review the FCC decision. "We believe that the FCC has abdicated its responsibility to protect the public interest and instead has chosen to advance the private financial interests of a single giant corporation," said Jason Oxman, senior vice president at Comptel.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=internetNews&storyid...
March 30, 2006
THE WATCHDOG AWAKES
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff]
[Commentary] The Federal Election Commission finally did the right thing in ruling that the Internet must not be used as a conduit for unregulated salvos of big-money political advertising. Scolded by a federal judge, the commission reversed its earlier rule that threatened to turn the Web into a giant trough for the six- and seven-figure donations from corporations, unions and fat-cat influence shoppers that Congress banned in the campaign reforms of 2002. The F.E.C. ruling against such "soft money" corruption is welcome as well for its ringing endorsement of the free-speech rights of political bloggers, who had been concerned that they would be unfairly hobbled by any campaign controls on the Web. To the contrary, bloggers have now been assured of the same wide latitude to opine free of government control as newspapers enjoy, so long as they are not paid by a political campaign. The commission's action is timely for effectively skewering a brazen attempt in the House this week to make the Internet a soft money cornucopia beyond the reach of campaign law. The measure was peddled in the name of protecting bloggers' free speech, but that veil has been shredded by the F.E.C.'s rule. House Republican leaders wisely pulled the measure from the agenda rather than laying bare the political greed of trying to make the Web a supermarket for influence peddling.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/30/opinion/30thur3.html
(requires registration)
The Watchdog Awakes