Verizon Urges House to Split Franchising from Telecom Bill
The House telecom package still doesn’t “have wings” after a year of work, so lawmakers should pass video choice and other provisions that have support, Verizon Exec. Vp Tom Tauke told reporters Fri. Rather than let another year pass without a law, Tauke said, “we'd like to see the House consider some alternative approaches.” Video franchising could move quickly, while universal service, intercarrier compensation and similarly complex matters could drag on, Tauke said: “If you can’t get the whole loaf, let’s get a portion of it.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
“Another option might be to say ‘We've tried to do this on the basis of technology and we're having problems with that approach, so maybe we need to look at another approach,'” he said. Even as he nudged the committee to move on a matter of key importance to Verizon, Tauke lauded House legislators for their work on the telecom bill.
It might make sense for new entrants, such as Verizon, to get different treatment from cable companies, Tauke said. “We're anxious for movement,” he said. Existing laws and regulations don’t meet communities’ or consumers’ needs, he said: “Therefore, Congress should act.” A Barton spokesman said “clearly any talk of splitting up the bill is premature.”
House Commerce Committee members so far have resisted pressure to fracture the telecom bill, sources said. At a recent FCBA panel, House Telecom Chief Counsel Howard Waltzman said Commerce Committee Chmn. Barton is committed to a full telecom package, with negotiations proceeding with minority staff as if the bill will remain intact. The goal is to get the bill through the House. The Senate timetable differs, with hearings planned through mid-March. After those hearings, Chmn. Stevens has said, the panel will know better what legislative direction to take. Both houses face overriding pressure: A session shortened as Nov. elections draw lawmakers away from Washington in the summer.
While pursuing federal legislation, Verizon continues to seek market entry 3 other ways, Tauke said: (1) The “old fashioned way,” seeking local franchises. Verizon had 50 at the start of 2006 and is negotiating for 400 more, he said. “The hill keeps getting higher to climb as we move forward because the numbers are just overwhelming.” (2) Seeking statewide franchise laws. Besides legislation passed last year by Tex., other states are working on measures, Tauke said. “Key legislators” in Va. have agreed on a statewide entry package and the company also is seeking legislation in N.J., Cal. and Ind., whose state Senate last week passed legislation. The company plans to target Fla. and possibly Md., N.Y. and Mass., he said. (3) Working with the FCC, which has opened a proceeding to look at entry barriers.
“We believe the FCC has some ability to define what is unreasonable action by local franchising authorities,” Tauke said. The FCC could the limit the time communities can spend acting on franchise filings and the build-out requirements they can apply, he said. The Commission also could look at unrelated requirements such as paying for placement of flower baskets on all of a town’s light poles or funding a sculpture in front of City Hall, both raised in Verizon’s talks with cities. “Local communities are strapped for money, but we don’t feel it is appropriate for us to fill that hole… through the franchising process,” Tauke said.
Verizon is willing to accept traditional franchise requirements such as fees, carrying PEG channels and abiding by redlining provisions, Tauke said. Asked about build-out requirements, he said phone firms have a hard time meeting build-out requirements because “we don’t build networks according to community lines.” That’s why Verizon finds it difficult to deal with a Cal. law requiring companies to build out entire communities before offering service. That makes entry in that state a “high financial hurdle,” he said.
On another topic, Tauke said Verizon backs net neutrality but wants it obtained through industry efforts, not govt. fiat. “It is important to keep hammering about the value” of the net neutrality principles the FCC espouses, but “we are not sure it is a great idea to start adopting a lot of regulations,” he said. “We look at what’s happening with govt. involvement in the Internet across the world,” such as efforts in Europe to “take over the management of the Internet” or in China, where the govt. is trying “to restrict content consumers can receive over the Internet,” he said: “All of these things highlight to potential danger of having governments get involved in the regulation of the Internet space.”
Asked if industry pledges can ensure neutrality, Tauke said one idea is for companies to sign off on the principles “and have some mechanism by which consumers would know which companies are with the program and which ones aren’t.” Verizon is “talking to other players in the industry to see how we can create… market pressure on everybody to abide by the open market principles -- and if there is an outlier who doesn’t abide by the principles, consumers would be aware,” Tauke said. He wouldn’t comment on other companies’ views on network access.