Copyright 2000 eMediaMillWorks, Inc.
(f/k/a Federal
Document Clearing House, Inc.)
Federal Document Clearing House
Congressional Testimony
May 10, 2000, Wednesday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 1507 words
HEADLINE:
TESTIMONY May 10, 2000 W.J. BILLY TAUZIN REPRESENTATIVE HOUSE
COMMERCE telecommunications, trade and consumer protection FCC REGULATIONS
MARKUP
BODY:
Statement of Congressman W.J. "Billy"
Tauzin Chairman, Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer
Protection Mark-up of H.R. 3489, the "Wireless Telecommunications Sourcing and
Privacy Act" and H.R. 4201, the "Noncommercial Broadcasting
Freedom of Expression Act of 2000 5/10/99 The Subcommittee will come to order.
The Chair will recognize himself for an opening statement. In the Full
Committee, we just marked-up a bill dealing with the issue of Internet Taxation.
Our subcommittee now meets to mark- up H.R. 3489-- a measure affecting the
taxation of another popular communications medium: Wireless telecommunications.
We also meet today to mark-up H.R. 4201 -- a bill introduced by Messrs.
Pickering, Oxley, Stearns, Largent and Myself to make sure that, once and for
all, the FCC cannot target and discriminate against religious
messages broadcast over the noncommercial airwaves. H.R. 3489 is a strong bill
that enjoys clear bipartisan support on this Committee and that makes sense for
consumers, state and local taxing municipalities, and cellular providers. The
mobility of wireless telecommunications has always made the determination of
which state and local taxes apply to any particular wireless call a complicated
and expensive task. The problem is that there are many methodologies -
originating cell site, billing address, switch location, and others- which give
rise to multiple claims on the same tax revenue, double taxation, and other
administrative problems. Because these existing methodologies all have their
shortcomings, many states and localities have developed a new methodology
together with industry - assigning all state and local telecommunications taxes
imposed on consumers to one location: THE CUSTOMER'S PLACE OF PRIMARY USE. H.R.
3489 seeks to codify this method as the only method, and as a result, provides a
uniform method for fairly and simply determining how state and local
jurisdictions tax wireless communications. H.R. 3489 will provide consumers with
simpler billing ... and God knows they need that. It preserves state and local
authority to tax wireless services, and it reduces the chances for double
taxation from competing jurisdictions. The bill does NOT, on the other hand,
impose any new taxes, reduce tax obligations for the wireless industry, or
mandate any expenditure of state or local funding. H.R. 3489 is a good bill, and
I urge its support. H.R. 4201 is also a good bill because it seeks to stop the
FCC from ever discriminating against religious broadcasters
again. Earlier this year, the FCC sought to quantify the service obligations of
noncommercial television licensees by requiring that "more than half of the
hours of programming aired on a reserved channel must serve an educational,
instructional, or cultural purpose in the station's community of
license." The Commission further determined that while
programming which "teaches about religion" would count toward the new benchmark,
programming "devoted to religious exhortation, proselytizing,
or statements of personally-held religious views and beliefs"
would not qualify. In drawing substantive distinctions between varying
religious messages, the FCC clearly attempted to impose
content-based programming requirements on noncommercial,
religious television broadcasters without considering the
implications such requirements had on Broadcaster rights under the First
Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Well, in
the wake of these actions, the FCC was inundated with stern opposition to the
"additional guidance" portion of its WQED Pittsburgh Memorandum Opinion and
Order. This opposition came from noncommercial licensees, listeners and viewers,
religious groups, and from the Hill, in waves. Fortunately, in
response to our collective public outcry over its actions, the FCC wisely
decided to vacate the additional guidance portion of its Order by a vote of 4 to
1. For that, I do commend the Commission; however, I feel that there is still
some cause for concern here. Despite the 4 to I reversal of its Order, it is
clear that some Commissioners still contend that the "additional guidance"
portion of the Order represents sound policy that offends neither the first
Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, nor
traditional American values. Commissioner Tristani even asserted at our hearing
that she, "for one will continue to cast (her) vote in accordance with the views
expressed in the additional guidance. . . This gives me the eerie feeling that
if we in Congress don't legislate in this area as soon as possible, then the FCC
will once again attempt to impose onerous and unreasonable eligibility standards
upon those entities seeking to receive and maintain noncommercial educational
broadcast licenses- and once again, I fear that these standards
will have the net effect of directly discriminating against
religious content. I know that many of my colleagues here have
similar fears, and consequently, we are moving forward today with H.R. 4201. In
just a moment, I will be introducing an amendment in the nature of a substitute
that makes a few changes to H.R. 4201. These changes are directed at addressing
some of the concerns that were revealed at our hearing last month.
LOAD-DATE: May 15, 2000, Monday
