DEBBIE STABENOW 
MICHIGAN 
The Honorable Thomas E. Wheeler 
Chairman 
731 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING 
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-2204 
July 8, 2016 
Federal Communications Commission 
445 l 21h Street, SW 
Washington, DC 20554 
Dear Chairman Wheeler: 
COMMITTEES 
AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY 
BUDGET 
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 
FINANCE 
I am writing both to commend the Commission's ongoing work to evaluate competition and 
consumer choice in the set-top box marketplace, and to raise concerns about the potential effects 
of the proposed rule on small multi-channel video programming distributors (MVPDs) in my 
state and across the country. 
As you know, Section 629 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 called on the Federal 
Communications Commission (FCC) to ensure the competitive availability of the navigation 
devices used to access video programming. Today, more than 20 years after the law's passage 
and serval attempts by the Commission to increase competition in the set-top box market, the 
majority of pay-tv consumers must rent proprietary set-top boxes to receive full access to the 
content they pay for. The market is already moving in the direction of increased choice and 
innovation, and companies are working to meet the demands of consumers who want to access 
video content at any time, in any place, on the device of their choosing. However, I agree that 
more can be done, and am hopeful that with continued consultation with consumers and industry 
stakeholders, the FCC can address the goals of all parties. 
However, I am especially concerned that compliance with the proposed rule could have a 
disproportionate effect on small MVPDs, and that these businesses have not been provided 
sufficient information on the expected administrative and technological costs. While I understand 
that these costs are difficult to estimate because the technological standards will be developed 
over time, it is important that the FCC work with small MVPDs to address this issue. If the 
compliance cost is significant, it could create a new barrier to market entry or even force existing 
companies to close. This effect would run counter to the goal of increasing competition, and 
could actually decrease consumer choice, especially for those in rural areas. 
PRINTI:O ON RCCYCLED PAPER 
550
I urge the Commission to further study the costs of small business compliance and address these 
concerns, and thank you for your continued work to improve competition and increase consumer 
choice. 
Sincerely, 
Debbie Stabenow 
United States Senator