Telecom Rewrite Breaks Faith With Earlier Version

Jeff Arnold is deputy legislative director for the National Association of Counties (NACo). This story was reprinted with permission from NACo's County News Online.

You can call it a "bait 'n switch." The draft rewrite of the telecommunications law of 1996 -- BITS II -- the subject of a hearing on Capitol Hill Nov.9 -- bore little resemblance to an earlier version -- BITS I -- which had been negotiated for months by a cadre of state and local government representatives, bi-partisan Hill staffers and telecommunications industry reps.

BITS II is at odds with NACo's policy on video franchising and could potentially create havoc with local governments' ability to appropriately manage the local rights-of-way.

The new draft "breaks faith with those deal points" about county officials' willingness to negotiate a streamlined nationwide franchising process, said Montgomery County, Md. Councilmember Marilyn Praisner in her testimony before U.S. House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.

"This is an inappropriate federal and private industry intrusion into our streets and sidewalks," she added.

Local governments' "deal points" in any new telecommunications law include:

• Universal service, E-911, local emergency alerts and the nation's homeland security in an IP era must be preserved.
• State and local governments' property rights and authority for managing the nation's rights-of-way must be kept whole. Private, for-profit, and quasi-permanent occupancy of the most valuable real estate held by government must be fairly compensated -- both through social obligations to the community served and in rental fees.
• Local governments must have the right to provide broadband transport and communications services to themselves and to their constituents to further important community interests.
• The local telephone company franchise should be comparable to the terms and conditions applied to their cable competitors.
• Consumers need choice of broadband providers with guaranteed network neutrality. The owner of the broadband pipe should never discriminate among service providers nor limit the consumer's access to those services.

Michael Willner, chief executive officer of Insight Cable, representing the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, blasted the nationwide franchise concept contained in BITS II, which would replace the current system of local franchises under which the cable TV sector operates. "I am concerned that Congress is becoming dangerously close to wearing black-and-white striped shirts ... as referees of this game of competition between the Bells and cable companies," he declared.

Not unsurprisingly, top officials from Alcatel North America, SBC Communications and Verizon Wireless praised the new draft, which would favor Bell firms such as SBC and Verizon more than the previous draft released in September. A witness from Microsoft focused his criticism on network neutrality. Entities that provide subscribers with information derived from the Internet "should adhere to the core principles of net neutrality," said Paul Mitchell, general manager of Microsoft TV.

House Energy and Commerce Chairman Joe Barton, (R-Texas), said the proposed changes on network neutrality were occasioned by concerns of content providers such as Hollywood-based firms. "If we didn't make some sort of a change, the content providers would be susceptible to Internet viruses, and the content providers wouldn't provide us with content," Barton said.

The Chairman of the Subcommittee, Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said the committee was anxious to move the legislation quickly, but made clear that any action would come after Thanksgiving at the earliest.

Praisner, who chairs NACo's Telecommunications and Technology Steering Committee, testified on behalf of NACo, the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors, and TelecommUnity, a local government telecom advocacy group.