[A2k] Network Neutrality Turf War in House

[Seth Johnson]

> http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/television/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002464762


May 09, 2006

McCain tunes a la carte bill for cablers


By Brooks Boliek

WASHINGTON -- A key senator is planning to introduce legislation
designed to spur cable companies into offering programming on a
channel-by-channel basis, industry sources said Monday.

The bill, which Sen. Jon McCain has been mulling for some time,
would relieve such cable companies as Comcast and Time Warner
that have significant programming interests of their local
franchise requirements  if they offer a la carte channel choices,
industry executives said.

While McCain could introduce the legislation as early as Tuesday
its chances for passage appeared slim as there are few work days
left in this Congress and lawmakers are eager to return home to
campaign for re-election.

McCain's move comes as momentum for approval of legislation that
more  broadly alters the regulatory landscape for cable and
telephone companies appeared to slow.

Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, has scheduled a hearing for May 18 on
his legislation that aims to make it easier for telephone
companies to compete with cable companies in the video
marketplace. Stevens, who  chairs the Senate Commerce Committee,
plans for a pair of hearings on his legislation.

Meanwhile, in the House, legislation designed to make it easier
for the big phone companies to get into the video delivery
business has become part of a turf war between the House
Judiciary Committee and the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

The House Commerce Committee overwhelmingly approved legislation
last week giving telephone companies a national video franchise
(HR 4/27).  Judiciary Committee chairman Rep. F. James
Sensenbrenner Jr., R-Wis., asked the House leadership for a cut
at the legislation. In a 24-page letter to the House
parliamentarian, Sensenbrenner said his committee should get to
review the legislation because it steps on that panel's copyright
jurisdiction. The Commerce committees on both sides of the
Capitol have jurisdiction of telecommunications, while the
Judiciary committees have jurisdiction of copyright issues. Those
jurisdictional issues often collide.

If the Judiciary Committee gets to review the bill -- making any
changes  it wants or rewriting it entirely -- it will be that
much more difficult  to win approval of the bill this year. Any
legislation that doesn't win approval by both houses this
Congress will die. Once the new Congress comes in following the
November elections, all bills will have to start over again from
scratch.

All the hearings and committee machinations make it more unlikely
that a bill can make it to the president's desk for his
signature. Both houses have to approve identical bills before
President Bush would get a chance to sign it.

"It looks like things have slowed down quite a bit," one industry
lobbyist said.

Failure to win approval for Communications Opportunity, Promotion
and Enhancement Act (COPE Act) would be a victory for the cable
industry and proponents of so-called "net neutrality."

Although the cable industry is not openly lobbying against the
COPE bill as approved by the Commerce Committee, as they
persuaded lawmakers to modify COPE so they get relief from local
franchise requirements once a phone company enters the market,
the bill's death would not raise any howls from them.

Network-neutrality proponents, mostly Democrats, contend that the
government should prevent the network companies from favoring one
person or company's programming or data over another. They are
backed by many of the nation's Internet and high-tech companies,
including Google, Amazon and Microsoft.

Opponents of the idea, mostly Republicans, contend that a
network-neutrality requirement is an unnecessary government
intrusion.  They are backed by such big network companies as
AT&T, Verizon and Comcast.

The bill's failure would give network-neutrality proponents more
time to win lawmakers over to their view, and the election could
make it easier for them if lawmakers were elected who are more
amenable to their views.