A wide array of witnesses appeared before the House Subcommitttee on Telecommunications and the Internet to discuss draft legislation on Internet protocol and broadband. Barrington Broadcasting's Jim Yager was there on behalf of the National Association of Broadcasters, making the point that protections for free over-the-air television built into the Cable Act of 1992 need to be extended into this new era, to new delivery platforms. Yager started by welcoming new entrants into the MVPD business. At the same time, he noted the critical role broadcast stations play in providing content of local interest, particularly in an emergency situation. To preserve local service, protections already on the book for cable need to be extended. "The must-carry rules guarantee that even the smallest station, in the most remote market, is not locked out of cable households," said Yager. "The flip side of the coin is retransmission consent. It recognizes that cable operators derive great benefits from local broadcast programming. So, the '92 Act gives stations the option to negotiate carriage terms with cable operators. Together, the retransmission consent and must-carry laws have been a win-win for both viewers and for local television." He also pointed out the need to protect network and synidcated exclusivity. Finally, he argued against a four-year review, saying statutory certainty was a necessary element of any legislative package.

---

Yager's full testimony

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Markey, Members of the Committee.

My name is Jim Yager. I own and operate 5 television stations throughout Michigan, Illinois, Missouri, and Texas.

Television broadcasters believe the technology and business models being discussed today will inject much needed competition into the multi-channel video marketplace. Enhanced competition will give broadcasters new platforms for distributing their local programming. That's good for our viewers, your constituents. It gives them more options.

So, we support the Committee's effort to spur competition.

However, as the Committee moves forward, we urge you to be mindful of your longstanding goal of promoting localism by preserving a vibrant system of free, over-the-air, local television. I don't think anybody disagrees: local television is part of the fabric of communities across this country. Viewers rely on our stations for local news, sports, weather and political coverage. Before, during and after disasters, over-the-air television provides a lifeline of emergency information.

So, as Congress develops the ground rules for I-P video, the policies that promote localism today should also govern the relationship between broadcasters and video over broadband providers.

When Congress enacted the 1992 Act, it was concerned that video distributors have an incentive to delete, reposition or even refuse to carry local stations.

Congress also acknowledged that a vibrant, over-the-air system requires access to cable households. With these concerns in mind, Congress crafted the current must-carry, retransmission consent system. This two-sided coin has strengthened localism. The must-carry rules guarantee that even the smallest station, in the most remote market, is not locked out of cable households.

The flip side of the coin is retransmission consent. It recognizes that cable operators derive great benefits from local broadcast programming. So, the '92 Act gives stations the option to negotiate carriage terms with cable operators.

Together, the retransmission consent and must-carry laws have been a win-win for both viewers and for local television. It therefore makes sense that must-carry and retransmission consent should be applied equally to video broadband providers.

Other rules are important to localism and must be preserved.

Congress has long recognized network affiliate stations' rights to be the exclusive provider of network programming in their markets. Congress and the Commission have acknowledged the importance of stations' exclusivity for syndicated programming.

Local advertisements sold by a station during network programming like 60 Minutes or Lost and during syndicated programming like Oprah Winfrey fund local programming and local news.

Mr. Chairman, as NAB testified in April Congress developed this framework to ensure that cities as large as New York and as small as Marquette, Michigan can have their own, unique broadcasting voices.

Unfortunately, the staff draft would put these principles in continual jeopardy by requiring that the rules be reviewed unnecessarily - and potentially rolled back - every four years.

Why do laws like must-carry, that Congress enacted in 1992, that have been reaffirmed not once but twice by the Supreme Court, and that have benefited millions of viewers suddenly need to be defended every four years? This will only inject uncertainty into the market and unduly harm viewers.

The notion that the FCC might repeal retransmission consent while leaving in place the cable compulsory license is particularly troublesome to broadcasters.

Absent retransmission consent, a video distributor would simply take a broadcaster's signal and profit from it. Meanwhile, the government would set the rate by which the broadcaster is compensated and the station would never even have the opportunity to negotiate its carriage terms.

Under the staff draft, broadcasters would face this specter every four years.

Setting aside the four-year review process, the staff draft has other shortcomings. Many of the ground rules that apply to cable - - like must-carry and retransmission consent - - are in statutory form. The staff draft orders the FCC to create supposedly parallel rules for the new broadband video services.

But, a statute is a statute and a regulation is a regulation.

Statutes are stronger than regulations. They provide certainty. What's in statute for cable should also be in statutory form for the new video distributors.

Mr. Chairman, our industry and your constituents stand to gain much through enhanced competition in the video distribution market.

We are ready to work with the Committee in achieving that goal, while simultaneously strengthening America's system of free, local, over-the-air television.