June 8, 2006

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 5252, the so-called Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006, H.R. 5252.

Supporters of this bill claim that if telephone companies provide video services to compete with cable and satellite, rates will decrease and quality of service will increase. I agree, but there is nothing in current law stopping phone companies from offering video services. Just ask Verizon, which currently offers fiber optic TV in 16 states – and counting. However, AT&T and others thought they could get a better deal from their Congressional benefactors. The Leave No Lobbyist Behind Republican Congress did not disappoint them.

This bill eliminates all requirements to build out service to an entire community, so if you want to benefit from competition, you better live on the right side of town with the rich people. Your city also better have enough money to have a lawyer permanently stationed in Washington, DC, because this bill gives the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) final say over all video services. Under current law, cities control when and where video providers dig up streets to lay cable and they set standards for customer service and billing. But small government Republicans think that the FCC knows better. They provide no new staff or money to handle this enormous responsibility, so expect a busy signal the next time you have a problem with your cable bill.

Finally, this bill was a critical opportunity to renew so-called “net neutrality” rules that require Internet Service Providers to treat all websites equally. When Google was being run out of a college dorm, the search page loaded just as quickly as Yahoo or MSN or the Comcast corporate website. The ability for so-called “garage inventors” to enter the market without paying a toll or suffering degraded service enabled the Internet’s rapid growth and success. Those non-discrimination rules ended last year, and broadband providers have made no secret of their desire to extract a high price for continued service. Their multi-million dollar campaign to defeat a net neutrality amendment only confirms their insidious plans.

This gift to giant telecom companies, devoid of any worthwhile public policy, is a disgrace, and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting no.