THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPETITION AND DEREGULATION ACT

Senate - June 09, 1995

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I understand that some negotiations were going on while we were in the quorum call.

I would like to note some of my feelings on this bill, because I will have a number of amendments and will be joining with others on amendments, including, for example, the amendment of the Senator from North Dakota, on VIII(c) and others.

Mr. President, the telecommunications bill that we are considering will have an enormous impact on multibillion-dollar cable, phone, and broadcast industries.

But beyond that, it also affects the pocketbooks of every one of our constituents, and of every single American. It will affect the array of telecommunications services available for each of us, and the choices that we as Americans and as consumers will have.

Most of us and certainly this is true in Vermont, have no choice who gives us cable TV service or our local phone service. Whether or not the service is good, we are stuck with our local phone or cable company. We do not have any choice in the matter.

And, if the price is too high, our only choice is to cut-back on service or to drop it altogether. When I look at the telecommunications bill, my first question is will this foster competition, because competition will give consumers lower prices and more choices than simply cutting back or dropping a service altogether.

I think Congress has been behind the curve in telecommunications. We need to update our laws to take account of the blurring of the formerly distinct separation of cable, telephone, computer, and broadcast services, and encourage new competitors in each of these markets.

The distinguished Senator from South Carolina [Senator Hollings], I know, worked at trying to bring out a bill to that effect last year. Efforts have been made between the distinguished managers, the chairman, and the ranking member this year.

The key, in my view, is providing a legal framework that promotes competition and protects consumers.

The Government's role in the future of telecommunications must be carefully defined. There is no question that bad regulation can stifle the growth of industry. There are other times, however, when both the Federal and the State agencies can foster the competition we need. And, of course, that is particularly important if you are dealing with monopoly industries.

Senator Thurmond, the chairman of the Antitrust Subcommittee, and I held a hearing on this bill a few weeks ago. One witness pointed out there are only two things standing between a monopolist and the consumer's wallet: Competition or regulation. You need one or the other, because if you get rid of both, the consumer may as well just hand over his wallet.

Some of the efforts made in doing away with regulation give some of the telecommunications giants a license to print money. They certainly will not reduce prices--if all regulation is done away with, and there is no competition there. What is their incentive? To lower costs? Of course not. That is as apt to happen as a belief in the Easter bunny. The fact is, they will raise costs.

So I have a number of questions. I hope with some amendments we can address some concerns I have with the bill.

First, the bill would permit our local phone monopoly to buy out our local cable monopoly so the consumers have even less choice. If you have just one monopoly cable company and one monopoly telephone company, and that telephone company buys out the cable company, do you really think rates are going to go down for your cable service? Of course not. We have not found any cable companies by themselves that have been eager to lower rates, and they do not. Suddenly, if there is no regulation and no possibility of competition, one company owns both the telephone and the cable, it does not take a genius to know what happens. The price goes up. In fact it is a new version of Willie Sutton, go to that monopoly because `that is where the money is.'

So, as we stand on a precipice between a new world of healthy competition between telephone and cable companies to serve all consumers, let us not go back to a one-wire world, where one monopoly company does both cable and phone service.