Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Conference Report to S. 376, the so-called "ORBIT" bill.

The bill would mandate the privatization of two international treaty organizations, INTELSAT and Inmarsat, according to a specific timetable and criteria. Privatization of these organizations is a goal that many of us in Congress and the Administration have strongly supported for years.

It is interesting to note that these treaty groups themselves have been working diligently toward privatization as well. They have fully demonstrated their commitment to this goal, because to do so is in their own self-interest. In fact, Inmarsat has already privatized and INTELSAT is well on its way toward accomplishing this end.

Any opposition I had to the House-passed bill was based on my belief that the privatization criteria contained in it were too dictatorial; they had little chance of being accomplished in their original form; and the bill would ultimately lead to the perverse result of losing a strong competitor in the U.S. market.

I am happy to report that some of the more onerous provisions in the House bill have been removed in conference, and I believe the Conference Report is now worthy of support. If implemented properly, this legislation will allow privatization to move forward while preventing the unintended and undesirable result of reducing competition within our own borders.

Specifically, I am pleased that provisions were added in conference that protect national security and public safety agencies from losing INTELSAT services they need to perform their missions. I am also satisfied that U.S. companies who rely on INTELSAT will be given a voice in the FCC licensing process before INTELSAT services may be curtailed. The bill was also substantially improved by removing an unconstitutional provision that would have nullified existing legal contracts.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would like to mention another important change in this legislation that persuaded me to sign the Conference Report. It involves the treatment of spin-off companies, or so-called "separated entities," from INTELSAT. The original House-passed bill inappropriately singled out a specific company that was already spun off from INTELSAT, has since been incorporated, and is known as New Skies Satellites.

The earlier version contained provisions that would have been very punitive toward New Skies, apparently because the drafters believed that company might not be a true competitor to INTELSAT. However, New Skies has proven itself to be not only an aggressive competitor to INTELSAT, PanAmSat, and other satellite operators, but is a fully independent company with plans for an initial public offering.

In recognition of that impending IPO and New Skies’ clear demonstration to the marketplace of its independence, a majority of the House conferees, including myself, insisted on changes in the legislation to remove any doubt that New Skies meets the licensing criteria contained in the bill. These changes will ensure that if the FCC applies the licensing criteria of the bill fairly, as I fully expect that it will, New Skies will be granted full, nondiscriminatory access to the U.S. market and its customers will not be disenfranchised.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank my friend, Chairman Bliley, and Chairman Burns from the other body, for working with me to include these important changes to the bill and making it one we can all support.

I reserve the balance of my time.