WASHINGTON-The House GOP leadership’s drive to make telecommunications reform legislation more deregulatory is not expected to threaten the antenna siting provision that wireless carriers fought hard to include in the landmark bill, according to industry sources. Meanwhile, an expected floor fight on wireless resale now appears less likely as supporters of an amendment reassess their strategy.
The House is expected to take up a bill, sponsored by Commerce Committee Chairman Thomas Bliley, R-Va., later this month. Before then, Bliley must deal with a rival-albeit secondary-telecommunications bill authored by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde, R-Ill. Hyde’s bill gives the Justice Department a role that doesn’t exist in Bliley’s.
A companion telecom reform measure was approved 81-18 by the Senate last month, greatly improving chances of passing the legislation this year. Last year, under a Democratic-controlled Congress, telecommunications legislation was passed by the House but died in the Senate where rules allow members to thwart bills.
House and Senate bills would let local telephone companies, long-distance carriers and cable TV operators compete against each other and foster further deregulation of paging, cellular, specialized mobile radio and personal communications services.
House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., and the seven Baby Bells are exerting pressure for changes to the Bliley bill that would make it easier for local telephone companies to enter the long-distance market. The Bells favor the Senate bill over the House bill. The opposite holds true for AT&T Corp., MCI Communications Corp., Sprint Corp. and other interexchange carriers.
“I think the [House-Senate] conference committee is going to write this bill,” said Thomas Wanley, head of congressional relations at the Personal Communications Industry Association.
The Clinton administration, for its part, sees both House and Senate telecommunications bills as bad for consumers and competition.
“If the final legislation looks like the bills reported out of the House Commerce Committee and Senate … maybe we’ll regret that we started down this path of reform,” said Larry Irving, chief of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
The White House has hinted it might veto a bill that doesn’t address its concerns, but Republicans believe the administration is bluffing given Vice President Al Gore’s much-publicized vision for the information superhighway.
As efforts are made to further deregulate the House bill, the wireless telecommunications industry wants to make sure lawmakers do not target language requiring the Federal Communications Commission to set national antenna tower siting policy following negotiations between carriers and local and state government agencies, including those that oversee public safety.
So far, the provision seems safe, according to industry lobbyists. Gingrich endorsed the concept of federal siting guidelines at the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association’s annual meeting earlier this year.
Elsewhere, it is uncertain whether Joe Barton, R-Texas, a ranking member of the House Commerce Committee, will offer a wireless resale amendment on the floor. His office said he is undecided about going forward with the initiative.
In subcommittee and full committee markups, Barton agreed to withdraw different versions of the amendment at the request of House telecommunications subcommittee Chairman Jack Fields, R-Texas. Fields did so, according to observers, to protect Barton from an embarrassing defeat.
It was assumed the feisty Texan would take his fight to the House floor, but there are suggestions that Barton realizes his chances have not improved and that he might be better off pursuing the issue in another venue later.
“If there’s not a floor vote it’s not the end of the issue,” said David Gusky, president of the National Wireless Resellers Association. Barton, he noted, has vowed to continue addressing the resale issue outside of telecommunications reform.
The Barton measure would give the FCC discretion to mandate interconnected resale and enable resellers to be acquired by a facilities-based commercial wireless carrier in the same market. Resellers, by installing a switch, could offer the same wireless services provided by carriers who have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure.
Cellular carriers argue wireless resale is not needed in an industry that will become even more competitive with the arrival of up to six PCS licensees in a market. Resellers reply that the industry is dominated by a handful of telecommunications giants and could benefit from added competition from resellers.
