Telecommunications reform heated up this week in both Congress and the State Capitol.

In Congress, just one week after holding a hearing on a draft federal telecommunications reform bill, the House Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee marked up the measure, which aims to expedite the provision of video service by telecommunications companies through the creation of a national franchise system.

The unnumbered draft measure, entitled "Communications, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006" (COPE Act) was unveiled by the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Republican leadership last week after bipartisan negotiations on a federal telecommunications law reform measure broke down.

In Sacramento, Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and Assemblymember Lloyd Levine held a joint press conference announcing amendments to AB 2987 that would create a new statewide franchise for cable and video service providers. Speaking in a Capitol hearing room that had been redecorated to appear as a "stuck in the 1960s" living room - including a black-and-white TV with "snow" the predominant picture - the Speaker asserted that Californians needed this bill to ensure the expansion of video and Internet infrastructure.

The League and other local government organizations have significant concerns with both approaches.

AB 2987: Concerns for Consumers and Local Control

On April 6, the League issued a press statement listing concerns with AB 2987. These included concerns about build out provisions, consumer protection and customer service, the loss of video services to libraries and schools, loss of control over PEG channels and PEG support, loss of local control over public rights-of-way, and loss of local revenues from franchise fees and other local fees and taxes. (See "League Concerns with AB 2987".)

The bill has been referred to the Assembly Committee on Utilities and Commerce. No hearing date has been set.

Federal Markup Moves Forward

In Washington D.C., the League worked with other local government organizations to push for amendments to similar concerns identified with the draft federal measure. (See "Initial Concerns with the ’Communications, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006,’" located at www.cacities.org/telecom.)

Two Californians are on the subcommittee marking up the measure: Representatives George Radanovich (R-Fresno) and Anna Eshoo (D-Palo Alto). Supporting concerns raised by local governments, Congresswoman Eshoo offered an amendment during the committee mark up to clarify that providers of "Internet protocol" video service (IPTV), such as AT&T, would be included in the bill along with cable video service.

This issue became a focal point of the markup, as AT&T had submitted a letter (posted on the League’s website at www.cacities.org/telecom) to Committee Ranking Member John Dingell (D-Mich..), asserting that the company’s new enhanced internet/video service does not qualify as a cable service under current law or under the Republican draft measure - leaving the company free to pursue its own contract arrangements to provide service outside the framework of the new federal proposal.

Congresswoman Eshoo’s amendment was defeated after committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-Texas) maintained that the language adopted in the Republican committee draft included IPTV as a cable service, despite AT&T’s insistence otherwise.

The subcommittee went on to defeat two other amendments supported by local government groups. These were an amendment to require a build-out schedule for new video service providers; and an amendment to maintain local government control of public rights-of-way and settle public rights-of-way enforcement disputes locally, rather than at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as the draft bill prescribes.

A third amendment that sought to maintain current local government consumer protection mechanisms was withdrawn when the Republican committee leadership committed to work on similar language in the measure as it moves to markup at the full committee level.

Next Steps for the Federal Draft Legislation

While these amendments were not successful at the subcommittee markup, another opportunity to present similar amendments during the full committee markup remains. The League continues to work with California members on the committee (Reps. Waxman, Eshoo, Radanovich, Capps, Bono and Solis) and the national local government groups to refine these amendments and seek their adoption in the full committee markup, which is expected to occur later this month.

What Cities Can Do

Both California legislators and members of Congress are heading back to their districts for their respective spring breaks: the California Legislature for one week (April 10 - 14), and Congress for two weeks (April 10 - 21). City officials are encouraged to call their legislators and members of Congress and talk to them about cities’ concerns with the pending telecommunications legislation in the state Legislature (AB 2987 - Nunez) and in Congress.

To access background materials, a sample letter, talking points and other advocacy tools, please visit the League’s Telecom page at www.cacities.org/telecom. You can write letters online at the League’s online Advocacy Center (www.cacities.org/advocacycenter).

League regional representatives are also working to set up district-level meetings with members of Congress and legislators. To find out more about this activity, please contact your League regional representative.

Tips for Effective Advocacy

Remember that personal contacts with your representatives are going to carry the most weight - a phone call, a visit to the district office, some type of personal meeting. You can use the talking points on the League’s Advocacy Center (www.cacities.org/advocacycenter) to help get the conversation going. Second in the order of effectiveness: a faxed letter - on your letterhead - sent to your member.

Finally, if you don’t have time for the other options, use e-mail. It’s available on the Advocacy Center to make it easy for you to be an advocate for your city. It’s much better than not writing at all.