I also want to commend the broadcast and satellite industries for their diligent work in reaching a consensus on the delivery of distant network signals to consumers. When the Telecommunications Subcommittee met just a few weeks ago, many Members expressed great frustration at the intransigence of both sides in negotiating a private agreement. I am pleased that the industry heard the Committee’s message and redoubled their efforts in that regard.

While it is true that the private agreement is not a panacea for consumers, it is a good starting point – and this bill will further the cause. We should keep in mind, however, that the vast majority of subscribers whose distant network signals will be turned off later this year are not legally entitled to receive these signals, at least under current law. Therefore, one of the central questions before us today is whether the law needs to be changed so that more consumers can receive distant network signals legally in the future.

In my opinion, the answer to that question is yes – the law does need to be changed. It is clear that many households are not eligible to receive distant network signals from their satellite television provider – despite the fact that they are incapable of viewing an acceptable TV picture over the air.

There are two reasons for this unfortunate state of affairs. One is that the model used to predict whether an individual household is served by a local station is flawed. It does not take into account real world differences in terrain, building structures, and other land cover variations that affect a consumer’s ability to receive an acceptable quality picture over the air. The bill before us will remedy this problem by directing the FCC to build a new and improved model – taking into account these additional factors – on an expedited basis.

The second problem is that the signal strength benchmark currently used by the FCC may be antiquated. Today’s model was developed in the 1950s and assumes that consumers are willing and able to install a rooftop antenna on their homes – a faulty premise, indeed, for the many among us who live in condos and apartment buildings, and are subject to rules controlling the access, use and enjoyment of the property.

Just as important, the current FCC standard assumes that today’s consumers are quite content with the quality of television reception an off-air antenna has to offer. This is another faulty premise, judging by the tremendous volume of mail we receive every day on this subject. The bill before us fixes this problem as well, by directing the FCC to examine, over a two-year period, whether the existing standard needs to be changed.

These two provisions alone will go a long way toward improving the choices available to consumers, and providing much-needed competition in the video distribution market. But the bill does much more to help consumers cut the cord that binds them to their incumbent cable company.

This legislation finally gives satellite television systems the legal authority to transmit local television stations into local markets. So-called "local into local" service is arguably the biggest boon we can give consumers. Although satellite service is the fastest growing video distribution system available today, it remains severely hamstrung in its ability to compete with cable. In fact, the most common reason cited by consumers in their decision not to migrate from their cable system is that they can’t receive local television stations through the satellite dish. This bill will remove that major impediment once and for all.

In addition, the bill postpones the imposition of "must carry" requirements until 2002, giving satellite carriers the ability to roll out "local into local" service right away in many major markets. As capacity increases, and other "local into local" distribution systems come on-line, satellite carriers will be required to carry all local stations within each market they serve.

I believe this carriage requirement, beginning in 2002, is essential. It will help ensure that the several emerging television networks have the potential to strengthen their foothold in the market and compete effectively with the "Big Four." After all, stronger and more diverse broadcast outlets is a key prerequisite to deregulation of the broadcasting business – an important goal that I know is shared by many of my colleagues on this Committee.