Electronic Comment Filing System

ECFS Filing Proceeding: 92-266
Name of Filer: REP. BROWN
Author: BROWN, CORRINE
Lawfirm:
View Filing:
Pages 1 to 3 (3)
Type of Filing: NOTICE OF PRE-HEARING CONFERENCE
Exparte Presentation: YES
Date Received: 1/17/95
Date Posted: 1/19/95 12:00 AM
DA Number:
File Number: CONTROL NO. 5691
Address:

EX PARTE OR LATE FILED The Honorable Conine Brown U.S. House of Representatives 1037 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION DOCKET FILE COpy ORIGINAL RECEIVED JAN 171995 --.~ ~o:~:-- WASHINGTON January 3, 1995 OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN ., .. ? ? ? ? Dear Congresswoman Brown: 1bank you for your letter expressiDI your coucern reprdiDa the development of the Federal Communications Commission's cable rate replation policy. Speciftcally, you express concern that the views of cable franchising authorities have not been included in discussions about the Commission's proposed policy cbanles. I appreciate the opportunity to respond. On November 18, 1994, the Commission relelaed its SixtJI OrdI, on R8consiMrtltion, Fifth Report and 0'*" and Seventh Notiet ofPropoud 1bIlemtJking (die "GoiDa Forward Order"), MM Docket Nos. 92-266 and 93-215, FCC 94-286, adopdDa replatioDs for the cable television industry that provide cable operaton with additioDa1 inceDtives to expand their services and facilities in a way that both eDSUl'eS tbat cable rates are reasonable and expands the opportunities for cable pfOl1'llDDlm to reach viewers. Pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act and the C()IIUDission's rules, all u.erested parties were given the opportunity to participate in the rulematiag proceeclil. tbrouIh submission of written data, views, or arguments, as well as an opportunity to present the same orally. During the draftiD& of the Gom, Forward Order, your coacems, as well as those of your constituents, were included in the record CODIidered by the Commission. You may be u.erested to know that the NatioDal Association of TelecommuDicatioD Officers and Advisors (NATOA) also presented aqumeots in this prncadina reprdiDa the effect of the proposed goiDa forward mles on local fraDchisiDI authorities on beba1f of die many local franchising authorities within its membership. The Commission also specifically considered written comments fIled by the City of St. Louis, Missouri, wbich railed similar issues. In addition, senior staff members of the Cable Services Bureau participated in regular telephone conferences with NATOA officials. We believe that the views of the local franchising authorities were thoroughly considered. We believe the new 111les establisbed by the GoiDa Forward Order create a bal.nced set of initiatives that allow cable operaton needed incemves to add DeW cable pt'OII'aDIIIlin that, in tum, will benefIt subscribers. We have attempted to address your coocems and those of other local authorities in the Going Forward Order. AmoDa other tbinls, we made the new channel addition rules generally applicable only to the cable programming services tier No. of Copiee rec'd ;)/ UstABCOE 't The Honorable Corrine Brown Page 2 ("CPST") and unregulated services. The major exception is that the new rules will affect rates on the basic service tier when an operator offers only one· tier of service. Since the new channel addition roles in most instances relate only to CPSTs, subscribers will still have the option of a low rate basic service tier. Furtbennore, by limiting the new channel addition rules to CPSTs in most instaDCeS, franchising authorities should not be inconvenienced by our new rqulatiODS because the responsibility of replating CPST rates lies with the Commission rather than with local authorities. Enclosed is a News Release that summarizes the Going Forward Order, as well as the Executive Summary from that Order. Please let me know if you would like a copy of the text of the decision. I trust that this response will prove both informative aDd helpful. Enclosures Dear Chairman Hundt: Mr. Reed Hundt Chairman Federal Communications Commission 1919 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20551 L. C~~""ITTfFS: PU8LIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION AVIBflon EconomIC Oe...elopment Wate," Resources and Environment VETERANS AFFAIRS Hosp,lal. and Heallh Care GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS Leg,slallon and Nalional Security MEMIEltSHIPS: Congress,onal Black Caucus Caucus on Women's Issues CongreSSIonal Sunbell Caucus Congrassional Space Caucus Congressional Fire Service, Caucus ?ongrt.. of tfJt .nittb 6tattl .ou.t of It.tprt.tntattbt' . ."bington.?~20515 CORRINE BROWN 3D DISTRICT, FLORIDA November 2, 1994 WASHINGTON OFFICE: 1037 Longworth BUlId,ng WashH·,gton DC 205~5 12021225-0123 "o.X '.2021 225-2256 DISTRICT OFFICES: 8 15 South MaIn Street IBM Building. SUite 275 Jacksony,lIe. "L 3 220 7 \9041 398-8567 "AX 19041 398-8812 75 Ivanhoe Boule"ard Chamber of Commerce Orlando FL 32804 (407) 872-0656 Fo.X 14071872-5763 C 401 SE '''St Avenue Room 3 16 G.,nesy,lIe FL 3260 I 1904) 375-6003 "AX 19041'375-6008 o 250 North Beach Street Room 80-! Davtona Beach FL 32 ! 14 '9041254-4622 "AX 19041 254-4659 I understand that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is developing a new policy with regard to cable rate regulation rules. While I have made no final decision about the proposed '( policy, I have received disturbing reports from local and county governments that franchising authorities are not being included in the FCCls current discussions about the proposed policy changes. As .you know under the 1992 Cable Act, local government is responsible for setting the rates for basic cable service, equipment, and for service calls. According to press reports and presentations at a recent national municipal meeting, you have met twenty times with cable operators, but only once with municipalities. The Cable Act made franchising authorities equal partners with the FCC in regUlatingr~tes.Franchising authorities, in other words, local and county governments, are very concerned that any changes from the FCC will be so burdensome that many communities will stop regulating rates or will have loopholes. The FCC needs to have their input to prevent problems such as these from occurring, but so far this has not happened. I urge you to meet with franchising authorities before implementing significant changes to cable rate regulation rules that could have such a major impact on consumers. Thank you for your attention to this matter. With kindest regards, I am C-s~ Corrine Brown Member of Congress CB:jr PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER