To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from adopting certain rules or policies relating to multichannel video programming distributors, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on the STELA.

First, I would like to thank Chairman Coble and Ranking Member Nadler for holding two Judiciary Committee hearings in the past year where we have examined the laws in the satellite television arena in Title 17 of the United States Code (U.S.C.), and related issues.

The relevant part of STELA expires at the end of the year but I am sure that those in the industry would have us do something before then and preferably before the lame duck session after November.

I would note the inclusion of a provision in this bill which some consumer groups find objectionable because it repeals the integration ban which deprives consumers of choice. This is from the Energy and Commerce Committee--though hopefully it will be worked out before the President signs--because consumers must not be deprived of choices.

And now that the Supreme Court has decided the Aereo case, we have another set of variables on the table.

I mention the Aereo case because it is the seminal case due to its timing but it also reminds us of how ephemeral our work can be in this Committee and this Congress.

Back in 1992 and through all of the other reauthorizations of STELA and the concurrent surge of innovation from the late 1990's until present day--who could have contemplated the existence of an Aereo, HULU, Netflix, or Pandora?

In doing so we are able to take a walk down the memory lane of analog and digital television, the role of cable and satellite providers, vis- a-vis their network partners.

It is useful to note that in the 18th Congressional District my constituents are able to avail themselves of DISH, Comcast, ATT, and even Phonoscope which I believe is one of the oldest in the nation and a Houston, Texas company since 1953.

In looking at these laws, we must note the role of the Copyright Office which released a widely-read report on the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act in August 2011 as ordered by the last reauthorization, and the GAO report which focused on consumer issues.

Americans from Houston, Texas, Chicago, New York, the Bay Area, and all across this great nation benefit from a broadcast system which consists of the laws which undergird the system, buffeted by the policy and practices by which transmitters, providers, artists, writers, musicians, and other creators of all stripes benefit.

The system stands on principles of balance and fairness which allow for continued innovation while not infringing on the property rights of others.

In my state, I see satellite dishes in urban and rural areas but it seems like a higher percentage of rural homes have DISH or DIRECTV than in the cities and towns. Is that an accurate observation and if so, why?

What is the justification for a 30 foot outdoor rooftop antenna being the standard for measuring whether a home can get a broadcaster over- the-air signal?

Who has 30 foot antennas on their rooftops these days? Can folks even go out and buy those and install them easily?

Shouldn't the standard reflect the consumer realities and be changed to a regular indoor antenna that can be picked up at most electronics stores?

What are the criteria for a household to be considered `unserved'? Does the current definition of unserved households adequately account for those homes that do not receive over-the-air signals?

This will be the 6th reauthorization of STELA but to my knowledge there has never before been a discussion of these blackouts, because they simply didn't happen in the past like they do today. We've gone from zero blackouts to 12 in 2010 and now 127 in 2013.

Viewers in my state have experienced their fair share of blackouts and I stand with them in saying: we don't like them.

We must all agree that blackouts must stop.

The statutory framework for the retransmission of broadcast television signals has been based on a distinction between local and distant signals.

The signals of significantly viewed stations and the signals of in- state, out-of-market stations in the four states that satellite operators were allowed to import into orphan counties under the exceptions in SHVERA, originate outside the market into which they are imported; in that regard, they are distant signals and they have been subject to the Section 119 distant signal statutory copyright license.

Since significantly viewed stations and the ``exception'' stations can be presumed to be providing programming of local or state-wide interest to counties in particular local markets, arguably that content could be viewed as local to the counties into which they are imported and should be treated accordingly.

STELA modified the Copyright Act to treat those signals as local, moving the relevant provisions from Section 119 to Section 122.

If a broadcaster opts to negotiate a retransmission consent agreement, cable companies are no longer required to broadcast that signal pursuant to the must-carry requirement. Furthermore, if negotiations for retransmission consent fail, cable companies are not permitted to retransmit the broadcast signals that they have not been granted a license to retransmit. This is precisely what has happened in the dispute between Time Warner Cable and CBS Broadcasting.

My concern is that when retransmission consent negotiations fail, consumers often look to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to mediate the dispute. However, the FCC actually has very little authority over retransmission consent negotiations. The Communications Act requires that programming be offered on a non-discriminatory basis, and that the negotiations be conducted in good faith.

The FCC has the authority to enforce both of these requirements, but does not appear to have the authority to force the companies to reach an agreement, or the ability to order the companies to continue to provide programming to consumers who have lost access while the dispute is being resolved. Therefore, as was seen in the debacle that was the TWC-CBS negotiation, unless negotiations are not occurring in ``good faith'' the FCC has little power over retransmission consent agreements.

STELA clarified that a significantly viewed signal may only be provided in high definition format if the satellite carrier is passing through all of the high definition programming of the corresponding local station in high definition format as well; if the local station is not providing programming in high definition format, then the satellite operator is not restricted from providing the significantly viewed station's signal in high definition format.

Studying What the Impact Would Be If the Statutory Licensing System for Satellite and Cable Retransmission of Distant Broadcast Signals Were Eliminated

The United States Copyright Office has proposed that Congress abolish Sections 111 and 119 of the Copyright Law, arguing that the statutory licensing systems created by these provisions result in lower payments to copyright holders than would be made if compensation were left to market negotiations. According to the Copyright Office, the cable and satellite industries no longer are nascent entities in need of government subsidies, have substantial market power, and are able to negotiate private agreements with copyright owners for programming carried on distant broadcast signals.

Congress must have a role in the broadcasting space but whether that is doing away with compulsory licensing or becoming even more involved is what needs to be discussed.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4572) to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to extend expiring provisions relating to the retransmission of signals of television broadcast stations, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials in the Record on the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Today, we are offering a bill that will ensure that 1.5 million subscribers in hard-to-reach areas, including many in my home State of Oregon, will continue to receive vital news and information through the television. The STELA Reauthorization Act extends the copyright and retransmission consent provisions for distant signals retransmitted by commercial satellite providers for 5 years.

Our committee has worked hard on this bill. We have engaged members of industry and consumer groups, and we have talked about the difficult policy matters that affect all consumers when it comes to video programming. Every member of our committee, on both sides of the aisle, has engaged with industry and consumers to figure out the right policy and to get to the right outcome, which we bring to you today.

Our bill not only reauthorizes the compulsory copyright and retransmission exemption for 5 years, but it also targets and, in some areas, gives much-needed reforms to our communications law.

Specifically, this bill repeals the FCC's integration ban on cable- leased set-top boxes. That clears the way for innovation and investment by lifting an unnecessary regulatory burden that has cost the cable industry and its consumers who pay the $1 billion--$1 billion, Mr. Speaker--since 2007.

I especially want to thank my friend, the extraordinary, terrific vice chair of the Telecommunications Subcommittee, Mr. Latta of Ohio, and my Democratic colleague from Texas, Gene Green, who brought this issue to our attention and helped us in this bipartisan lift to get rid of the integration ban.

Our bill also evens the playing field for cable operators and broadcasters during sweeps weeks by removing a government restriction on cable's ability to drop broadcast signals during the Nielsen sweeps.

Additionally, broadcast stations in a single market will no longer be able to negotiate jointly with pay-TV providers. Pay-TV subscribers will no longer have to worry about losing more than one signal should a programming distributor be unable to reach its retransmission consent agreement with a broadcast station.

These can be very contentious matters, Mr. Speaker. I am proud to say that the STELA Reauthorization Act is yet another example of working together, getting true bipartisanship, with support from all sectors of the communications industry.

This type of collaboration has long been the hallmark of our subcommittee and full committee, and I am pleased to see this legislative result. I can only urge the Senate to act swiftly and pass this bill into law before the end of the year.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim my time.

Mr. Speaker, with that, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the leader of our Energy and Commerce Committee.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

I thank the gentleman for his comments.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta), the vice chair of the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Vermont for his kind words and his good work on this legislation. Certainly, I recognize our counterparts on the Democratic side, Mr. Waxman and Ms. Eshoo, who have worked tirelessly on this bill, as well as their staff: Shawn Chang, Margaret McCarthy, and David Grossman. Also, our staff, David Redl; my senior policy adviser, Ray Baum; and Grace Koh, all of whom have spent a lot of time working this through.

It seems interesting that we get to this point and it kind of goes naturally, but there is a lot of work that went in to getting it to this point. So I thank our staff and the Members who worked with us in a very good-spirited way.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge the House to approve this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Today, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4572, the STELA Reauthorization Act, a bill that allows satellite providers to continue to offer broadcast television programming to their subscribers.

Americans across the country will benefit from reauthorizing the expiring communications and copyright statute that allows satellite customers to have access to broadcast content, but it particularly benefits rural communities, a concern of many of us in this body. Folks from Vermont are going to benefit by this. They rely heavily on satellite for access to video programming.

The STELA Reauthorization Act is the work product of two committees, the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Judiciary Committee. Because of the bill's complexity, both substantively and procedurally, the Communications and Technology Subcommittee held a series of hearings starting early last year to examine the various issues affecting our Nation's ever-evolving video marketplace. As a result, H.R. 4572 includes several targeted provisions designed to improve regulatory parity in the video marketplace.

One, the bill prohibits two noncommonly owned broadcasters from jointly negotiating for retransmission consent with cable and satellite companies.

Two, the bill also includes a compromise on the deadline for broadcasters to unwind certain joint sales agreements in an attempt to keep intact the FCC's local broadcast ownership rules.

The final provision we are voting on today strengthens the waiver process both for the broadcasters seeking to maintain their joint sales agreements, as well as for the FCC looking to streamline waiver applications.

In addition, the bill eliminates the FCC's integration ban for cable set-top boxes, a rule that was designed to help promote a retail market for cable set-top boxes that regrettably is not working as intended.

To allow independent manufacturers of set-top boxes a chance to compete, the FCC requires both cable companies and third-party set-top box manufacturers to rely on the same piece of technology to decrypt their signals, called the CableCARD.

Not only has this regime not resulted in the kind of competition Congress envisioned, energy experts told us that the CableCARD actually creates significant energy inefficiencies. So our bill takes this rule off the books, but does not place any forward-looking restrictions on the FCC's authority to continue to promote retail competition for set- top boxes.

These narrow changes only begin to scratch the surface of the broken video marketplace. In my view, Congress should revisit the entire video regime and update the corresponding laws to better represent the 21st century marketplace, to drive competition, and, most importantly, to provide more benefits to consumers.

The various stakeholders, from distributors to programmers to broadcasters and content providers, have all been able to reap financial rewards, as they should, in this video marketplace, but my concern and the concern of many of us is that the consumer has been left out of the equation.

They have paid, on average, twice the rate of inflation annually for cable over the past 20 years. I understand there are a lot of costs that go into the overall rate to consumers, but it is time for the consumers' concerns to be heard and responded to.

I want to thank Chairman Upton and Chairman Walden for working with Ranking Members Waxman and Eshoo and Democrats--thank you, gentlemen-- on the bipartisan compromise on this bill.

I urge my colleagues to support the passage of this bill today, but I do hope that this is only the beginning, and we can work together on a more comprehensive bill to address the broken aspects of the video marketplace.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Mr. Latta and Mr. Green for their very good work in making a good bill better. I want to also salute Mr. Upton and Mr. Walden for their good work, working closely in partnership with Mr. Waxman and Ms. Eshoo.

We have no further speakers, so I urge a ``yes'' vote on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4572, the STELA Reauthorization Act of 2014, as amended, which renews for another 5 years the statutory license that allows satellite providers to retransmit distance signals into a local broadcast area in certain circumstances.

The satellite distant-into-local license contained in section 119 of the Copyright Act is set to expire on December 31 of this year. Among other things, that license allows satellite carriers to provide an out- of-market station to customers who are not served by local television broadcasts.

Enacted in 1988 when the satellite industry was in its infancy, the section 119 license was intended to foster competition with the cable industry and also to increase service to unserved households, those subscribers who cannot receive an over-the-air signal of a local network. In 2010, as was the case on three prior occasions, Congress extended the section 119 license for another 5 years.

In granting cable and satellite providers the statutory right to retransmit copyrighted content at a government-regulated rate, Congress created an exception to the general rule that creators have exclusive rights to their works, including the right to determine when and how to distribute them.

This licensing system replaces the free market, something that we are generally reluctant to do. When we did so for cable and satellite providers, these industries were just starting up and the licenses were intended to encourage growth, foster competition, and enhance consumer access.

On these fronts, the system has been a tremendous success. It is estimated that nearly 90 percent of American households now subscribe to a pay-TV service provided by multichannel video programming distributors, in most cases, cable or satellite operators. Nearly all households have a choice of at least three different providers.

Nonetheless, the dramatic recent changes in marketplace dynamics, as well as technological advantages that revolutionize ways of distributing video content, raise legitimate questions about whether the statutory licensing system in the Copyright Act is still needed or should be changed.

I support this 5-year reauthorization of the section 119 distant- into-local satellite license. We still need answers as to how many households would actually lose one or more of the four major network channels if section 119 were not renewed. I, nonetheless, support this 5-year reauthorization because it will ensure that consumers who are receiving service by virtue of the section 119 license retain that service when the agreements providing for that service expire at the end of the year.

I hope we use the time afforded by this renewal to make the modifications to see if we have to keep the statutory license and keep away from the free market or modify the statutory license in the future. For the time being, we ought to extend it and renew this license now.

I, therefore, urge my colleagues to join me in voting for H.R. 4572.

I thank the gentleman, the chairman of the subcommittee, for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4572, the STELA Reauthorization Act.

For the last several months, Members of Congress have been earnestly engaged in collaborative discussions and a great deal of work regarding the reauthorization of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act. This must-pass legislation is key to ensuring that over 1.5 million consumers of satellite television service do not lose access to programming they rely on when the current measure is set to expire at the end of this year.

Through Chairmen Upton's and Walden's thoughtful leadership, the STELA Reauthorization Act also includes a few discrete and narrow reforms to laws governing the video marketplace. These reforms represent a critical step forward in modernizing our communications laws to reflect the rapidly evolving, dynamic, and competitive communications marketplace we have today.

I am especially pleased that a provision from my bipartisan bill, H.R. 3196, with Congressman Gene Green was included in this measure to eliminate the current set-top box integration ban. Repealing this outmoded technological mandate will foster greater investment and innovation in the set-top box market but, more importantly, will help decrease the cost of delivery to consumers.

Since the FCC adopted the integration ban, we have seen a tremendous amount of progress and competition in the video marketplace organically developed outside the set-top box retail market, all absent government regulation. Now, given the myriad devices and means through which consumers can access video content, the integration ban is an unnecessary regulation that does not reflect the state of competition, technological advancements, or consumer demands of today.

The elimination of the integration ban, along with the few other targeted reforms included in STELA, underscores the bipartisan commitment to ensuring that our communication laws maximize the potential for investment, innovation, and consumer choice.

I once again commend Chairmen Upton and Walden for their leadership in this effort.

Our priority in reauthorizing STELA has long been to ensure a continuity of service for satellite subscribers, and today's vote marks a critical step toward fulfilling that responsibility.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' and support this bipartisan legislation.