Capitol Hill action on radio performance royalties looks unlikely this Congress, advocates on both sides of the debate said on a panel Tuesday hosted by BroadbandBreakfast.com. It was one of the few things on which panelists agreed in an often heated and largely philosophical debate over the rights of performers to be paid for play on radio. While performance royalty legislation was approved by the Judiciary committees in the House and Senate last year, nothing has been introduced this Congress. But some lawmakers have signed onto non-binding resolutions against performance royalties. A standalone bill has “no shot” in the 112th Congress, but the matter could find traction if added to a larger appropriations bill, said Brian Gantman, a counsel with the Educational Media Foundation. EMF operates non-commercial radio stations and opposes performance royalties. Performance royalties will probably only move forward if the two sides present Congress with a negotiated settlement, said John Simson, a consultant and former SoundExchange executive director who supports the royalties. Congress is quiet, but industry talks are likely to continue, said David Oxenford, an attorney with David Wright who represents broadcasting and digital media companies. There is recognition by some in Congress that performance royalties are fair, but broadcasters opposing royalties are powerful lobbyists, said Michael Petricone, senior vice president of CEA, which supports royalty legislation. Meanwhile, Alliance for Community Media Executive Director Sylvia Strobel called predicting Hill action on the issue “a crapshoot.” But while the climate may not be right for Hill action, don’t expect the issue to go away, Simson said. “It’s not gone away for 80 years,” he said. “It will be here until it gets passed [and] until fairness finally triumphs.”
Adam Bender
Adam Bender, Senior Editor, is the state and local telecommunications reporter for Communications Daily, where he also has covered Congress and the Federal Communications Commission. He has won awards for his Warren Communications News reporting from the Society of Professional Journalists, Specialized Information Publishers Association and the Society for Advancing Business Editing and Writing. Bender studied print journalism at American University and is the author of dystopian science-fiction novels. You can follow Bender at WatchAdam.blog and @WatchAdam on Twitter.
Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Calif., plans Tuesday to reintroduce her broadband adoption legislation to create a USF Lifeline program subsidizing high-speed service for low-income Americans, a Matsui spokeswoman said. Matsui is a member of the House Communications Subcommittee. This year’s bill is largely the same as HR-3646 from the 111th Congress, but adds a provision to prevent duplication of subsidies. The bill may have to overcome concerns about government spending and balancing support to urban and rural areas.
Finishing public safety network legislation before Sept. 11 will be a challenge, said Senate GOP aides at an event Thursday hosted by Politico and Microsoft. The Senate Commerce Committee approved the spectrum bill (CD June 9 p2) by Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Ranking Member Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, on Wednesday. But the bill must still get floor time in the Senate and win over House Commerce Committee Republicans who are skeptical of giving away the 700 MHz D-block for free to public safety, the aides said. Also at the event, an FCC aide provided an update on the agency’s work revamping the Universal Service Fund.
Broadband is among the priorities of the new White House Rural Council established Thursday by President Barack Obama through an executive order. The council, which will include representatives of the FCC and the Agriculture and Commerce departments, will support Obama’s plan to expand broadband networks in rural areas, the White House said. Rural telecom companies praised the council’s focus on public-private partnerships to spread broadband. The council will provide recommendations for rural investment and increase coordination between government agencies involved with rural issues. It also will coordinate federal with state, local and tribal government efforts, and promote public-private partnerships, the White House said.
The Senate Commerce Committee approved comprehensive spectrum legislation in a 21-4 vote Wednesday. The bill by Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Ranking Member Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, would give the 700 MHz D-block to public safety and authorize voluntary incentive auctions, among other things. Communications Subcommittee Ranking Member Jim DeMint, R-S.C., was one of four Republicans who voted against the measure.
The price of public safety legislation is a major concern for Senate Communications Subcommittee Ranking Member Jim DeMint, R-S.C., going into Wednesday’s markup of S-911 in the Senate Commerce Committee. While the bill by Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Ranking Member Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, promises to send $10 billion to the U.S. Treasury, the bill’s cost could be an issue for other budget hawks as well, telecom industry lobbyists said. Meanwhile, public safety pushed back against a campaign to add language requiring interoperability across the 700 MHz band.
Budgetary scoring of the public safety spectrum bill before the Senate Commerce Committee will be requested after the committee’s markup Wednesday, a GOP committee aide said Monday. The Congressional Budget Office hasn’t issued a report yet in part because the language of the bill, filed last week, is still relatively fresh, the aide said. The spectrum bill’s impact to the federal deficit is expected to be a major issue as the legislation moves through Congress. In advance of the markup, the committee is negotiating with its members over nearly 80 amendments filed last week (CD June 6 p7), two Senate aides said. While many amendments are often filed on bills in Senate Commerce, the aides said there have been more than usual on S-911 due mainly to the heft of the bill. “There are still some tough issues to resolve for the bill to pass,” said MF Global analyst Paul Gallant, “but the official score from CBO should crystallize the budgetary benefits, which will be the main attraction for a lot of members.”
The House Commerce Committee is content to let the FCC take a first run at the Universal Service Fund overhaul, a committee spokeswoman told us Friday. “We are waiting to see what the FCC decides to do before we make a decision on whether legislation is necessary,” the spokeswoman said. Congress’ tacit approval of the FCC’s reform schedule had been expected (CD Feb 8 p1) but Friday’s statement comes amidst a blitz by rural telcos trying to get the Hill to intervene in the USF proceedings (CD May 25 p8). On the Senate side, Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va. has said D-block legislation is his “highest priority” (CD Feb 17 p4).
The White House is waiting for the FCC and most other independent agencies to submit plans on which of their existing rules should be streamlined, reduced, improved or eliminated, an Office of Management and Budget official said at a hearing Friday of the House Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. A January executive order by President Barack Obama required executive agencies to submit “lookback” plans, and encouraged independent agencies do the same. This fall, the Oversight Subcommittee will consider legislation forcing independent agencies to comply, said Chairman Cliff Stearns, R-Fla.
Senators have drafted a plethora of amendments to comprehensive spectrum legislation to be marked up Wednesday in the Commerce Committee. A substitute amendment to S-911 forming the base text of the bill by Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, surfaced last week (CD June 2 p9). At least 79 draft amendments were prepared by other members on the committee, including 30 by Senate Communications Subcommittee Ranking Member Jim DeMint, R-S.C. Historically in Senate Commerce, many amendments offered before markup are not agreed to and are not mentioned at the markup.