Current Right-Of-Way
Issues in Michigan
PROTEC Update
Click here
for the latest news from PROTEC
FCC Chairman Hopes FCC Will Act on PEG Petitions in “Near Future”
FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has recently said he hopes the FCC will soon
take action on the Petitions for a Declaratory Ruling PEG channels that were
filed in response to actions taken by AT&T and Comcast. He stressed
his belief in the importance of PEG channels as a source of local programming,
mentioning that the channels must receive “equitable treatment.”
The FCC Media Bureau is currently reviewing the record that has been developed
by the request for comments on the petitions, which closed on April 1.
Genachowski’s statements were prompted by a letter sent by Representative
Baldwin in August where she urged the FCC to “act promptly” on the
petitions that were filed in response to “inappropriate actions” taken
by AT&T and Comcast that made PEG channels “less accessible” to
the public. She said that these actions resulted in lower transmission
quality and higher prices for viewers.
House Bill HR 3745 Formally Introduced
Rep. Tammy Baldwin (Wisconsin) has formally introduced her PEG bill to the House,
which is intended to protect PEG from abuses which are currently being discussed
at the FCC and in courts around the country, including at the Detroit Federal
Court. It is called the CAP (Community Access Preservation) Act (HR
3745 IH). It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
It states “To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to provide for carriage
and display of public, educational, and government channels in a manner consistent
with commercial channels, and for other purposes.”
The CAP Act does not assume a “one size fits all” PEG structure. It
leaves the decision to negotiate for PEG channels to franchising authorities
and the local communities they represent. The Act would address the immediate
issues facing PEG channels by:
- Allowing PEG fees to be used for any PEG-related purposes;
- Requiring PEG channels to be carried in the same manner as local broadcast
channels;
- Requiring the FCC to study the effect state video franchise laws have had
on PEG channels, and requiring operators to provide the greater of the support
required under state laws, or the support historically provided for PEG;
and
- Making cable television-related laws and regulations applicable to all
landline video providers.
Since being introduced, the Act has already picked up two new sponsors - Representatives
Mike Thompson (CA) and John Larson (CT).
Charter Working To Move PEG Channels
Charter is trying to unilaterally move PEG channels to the 90-channel range
from historic locations in the single digits. Their action is due
on December 1. Litigation may follow to prevent this.
Should California Tax Satellite Television Companies?
The cable television industry in California is quietly trying to persuade the
state Legislature to levy a tax on its competitors.
Cable advocates in Sacramento want lawmakers to impose a new five percent tax
on satellite service to match the five percent franchise fee that cable companies
pay to string or bury their wires across public property and into homes.
The companies argue that it is a matter of fairness. They have to pay
a fee while satellite providers DirecTV and Dish Network do not have to pay
for the right to beam their signals into people's homes from space.
Satellite companies disagree, saying such a tax discriminates against their
3.6 million customers in California, especially rural residents living in remote
areas not served by cable. They believe they should not be penalized
with a tax because, as DirecTV mentions, they use innovative technology and
do not need to dig up the streets or people's backyards.
Discussion of the proposed satellite TV tax has been fairly quiet in the legislature
with no bill actually being written and no committee hearings held. Additionally,
consumers are critical about the proposal, as they do not think it is fair
to tax someone for the use of a satellite, as it does not encroach on their
property.
The cable companies’ movements mirror similar proposals debated in other
states. It has passed in Massachusetts but has failed in eight other
states.
Some lawmakers say the California effort may have to be put on hold until 2010.
copyright
PROTEC 2006 |
