*Pages 1--1 from  Microsoft Word - 53165.doc*
 STATEMENT  OF  COMMISSIONER  MICHAEL  J.  COPPS 
 Re:  Implementation  of  Section  621(  a)(  1)  of  the  Cable  Communications  Policy  Act  of  1984  as  amended  by  the  Cable  Television  Consumer  Protection  and  Competition  Act  of  1992,  MB  Docket  No.  05-  311 
 There  is  no  doubt  in  my  mind  that  more  competition  in  the  delivery  of  video  services  would  bring  significant  benefits  to  consumers.  When  people  have  more  options,  they  reap  big  rewards—  better 
 services,  higher  technology  and,  critically,  lower  prices.  This  is  precisely  why  Congress  laid  out  the  goal  of  promoting  competition  so  clearly  in  the  Communications  Act. 


 Cable  and  telephone  companies  are  beginning  to  compete  to  offer  consumers  the  much-  heralded  triple  play—  bundles  of  telephone,  video  and  Internet  services.  Cable  companies  have  already  jumped 
 into  the  voice  service  market,  and  telephone  companies  are  entering  the  video  fray.  This  crossover  is  exciting,  and  it  means  that  old  industry  boundaries  are  eroding,  giving  way  to  a  new  and  hopefully  more 
 consumer-  friendly  future. 
 The  Communications  Act  provided  a  process  for  entry  into  the  video  services  marketplace  under  which  cable  operators  must  secure  franchises.  This  process  recognizes  the  important  role  that  franchising 


 authorities  play—  ensuring  public  health,  safety  and  welfare;  preventing  economic  red-  lining;  managing  public  rights-  of-  way;  and  ensuring  access  for  public,  educational  and  governmental  channels. 


 This  system  has  generally  worked  for  consumers,  incumbent  cable  operators  and  municipalities.  It  also  appears  to  be  working  in  numerous  communities  for  new  entrants.  It  is  important  that  it  works  for 
 new  entrants  if  we  are  going  to  be  able  to  reap  the  rewards  that  competition  brings  to  consumers.  In  the  current  environment,  it  may  be  that  some  changes  are  called  for,  and  certainly  we  have  an  ongoing 
 obligation  to  consider  ways  to  improve  the  process.  That  is  why  we  initiate  this  proceeding  today.  If  we  find  hard  record  evidence  of  problems  that  need  to  be  repaired,  and  can  be  repaired  within  the  parameters 
 of  the  existing  law,  then  the  Commission  must  consider  taking  those  steps.  I  would  also  note  that  there  is  Congressional  interest  in  looking  more  broadly  at  how  the  statute  itself  is  accommodating  new 
 marketplace  developments. 
 What  this  Commission  decides  about  the  specific  issues  before  it  will  be  significantly  influenced  by  the  record  this  notice  elicits,  and  that  is  why  we  seek  a  full  record  and  why  I  emphasize  the  importance 


 of  widespread  participation  in  the  proceeding.  Until  we  obtain  a  full  record,  I  do  not  believe  the  results  of  this  proceeding  are  foreordained.  At  the  end  of  the  day,  I  am  hopeful  we  can  develop  a  thoughtful  and 
 balanced  approach,  one  recognizing  that  local  input  and  diversity  are  values  we  are  always  charged  to  nurture  even  as  we  meet  our  responsibilities  to  encourage  consumer-  friendly  competition  by  promoting 
 more  choices  in  the  video  services  market. 
1