*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 45849.doc*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  FCC  05-  12 
 1 
 JOINT  STATEMENT  OF  COMMISSIONERS  MICHAEL  J.  COPPS  AND  JONATHAN  S.  ADELSTEIN 
 CONCURRING 


 Re:  Implementation  of  Section  3  of  the  Cable  Television  Consumer  Protection  and  Competition  Act  of  1992;  Statistical  Report  on  Average  Rates  for  Basic  Service  Cable  Programming  Service  and 
 Equipment 
 Annual  Assessment  of  the  Status  of  Competition  in  the  Market  for  the  Delivery  of  Video  Programming 


 In  Sections  623(  k)  and  628(  g),  Congress  charged  the  Commission  with  reporting  annually  on  cable  rates  and  on  the  status  of  competition  in  the  market  for  the  delivery  of  video  programming.  As  the 
 government’s  expert  agency,  Congress  expected  the  Commission  to  gather  comprehensive  data  and  subject  it  to  in-  depth  analysis  in  these  reports.  Unfortunately,  in  these  reports,  the  Commission  gathers 
 less  than  adequate  data  and  conducts  less  analysis  than  it  did  even  a  few  years  ago.  At  a  time  of  significant  increases  in  rates  year  after  year,  Congress  and  consumers  deserve  a  better  effort  from  the 
 FCC. 
 We  took  issue  with  our  Report  on  cable  rates  last  year  because  we  believed  the  analysis  was  insufficient.  At  that  time,  the  Commission  recognized  the  report’s  shortcomings,  noting  that  “in  several 
 previous  surveys,  we  included  an  econometric  analysis  of  the  survey  results.”  The  Commission  further  stated  its  “plan  to  resume  the  econometric  analysis  in  subsequent  reports.”  Yet,  this  year,  the 
 Commission  again  fails  to  conduct  this  analysis  which  in  the  past  has  provided  information  on  specific  factors  that  influence  rate  increases  and  the  extent  of  that  influence.  Moreover,  the  Commission  once 
 again  did  not  audit  any  of  its  results,  notwithstanding  problems  with  our  methodology  disclosed  in  a  recent  report  from  the  General  Accounting  Office. 


 We  remain  concerned  that  this  year’s  competition  report  continues  to  serve  mainly  as  a  recitation  of  the  record  rather  than  providing  an  in-  depth  analysis  of  the  status  of  competition.  As  with  last  year’s 
 version,  this  report  fails  to  examine  adequately  the  circumstances  that  distinguish  those  places  where  competition  is  occurring  and  those  where  it  is  not,  and  to  evaluate  barriers  to  greater  competition.  And  it 
 fails  to  consider  sufficiently  many  of  the  important  issues  raised  in  the  Notice,  such  as  the  impact  of  increasing  vertical  and  horizontal  consolidation  of  our  media.  In  sum,  the  report  seldom  delves  beneath 
 the  surface. 
 In  part,  the  fault  lies  with  the  limited  data  we  received  in  response  to  our  notices.  But  it  is  also  incumbent  on  the  Commission  to  undertake  a  pro-  active  and  comprehensive  information-  gathering  effort 
 and  then  to  commit  the  resources  necessary  to  analyze  the  data. 
 We  recognize  that  there  have  been  some  positive  steps  in  these  reports  in  response  to  previous  criticisms.  For  example,  we  are  pleased  that  we  have  at  long  last  begun  to  analyze  what  is  happening  in 
 other  countries.  In  addition,  we  are  also  pleased  that  we  have  added  a  separate  section  that  focuses  specifically  on  video  program  distribution  in  rural  areas.  In  future  years,  we  would  like  to  see  us  build  on 
 the  discussions  here. 
 Finally,  notwithstanding  the  concerns  we  have  expressed  with  our  reports,  none  of  our  comments  should  take  away  from  the  large  investments  that  have  been  made  by  those  that  deliver  video 
 programming.  Nor  do  our  concerns  with  the  reports  diminish  the  benefits  American  consumers  receive  as  new  services  are  deployed.  These  investments  and  services  come  not  only  from  existing  participants  in 
 the  market  but  also  from  telephone  companies  and  others  that  are  expanding  their  efforts  to  deliver  video 
1
 Federal  Communications  Commission  FCC  05-  12 
 2 
 programming.  But  these  reports  serve  as  the  factual  foundation  for  many  Commission  decisions  as  well  as  providing  Congress  with  statutorily-  mandated  information  that  can  inform  the  national  policy  debate. 
 We  have  an  obligation  to  do  more  to  gather  accurate  and  complete  data  as  well  as  provide  the  information  and  analysis  that  Congress  required. 
2