Speaking yesterday to her colleagues on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) advocated strongly for preserving public, educational, and governmental (PEG) TV channels and community access television stations.
Baldwin’s remarks came as the House Committee on Energy and Commerce considered legislation that would update the communications laws to ensure that people with vision, hearing, and other disabilities have full access to existing and emerging technologies.
Reminding her colleagues that PEG channels must be accessible to people with disabilities, Baldwin addressed the significant broadcast and funding obstacles PEG channels are facing due to new statewide franchise agreements and a lack of federal protections.
Baldwin sought to strengthen the Twenty-first Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (H.R. 3101) by adding provisions covered in her bill, the Community Access Preservation (CAP) Act of 2009 (H.R. 3745), that would, among other things, require PEG channels to be carried in the same manner as local broadcast channels. For people with disabilities, the Baldwin amendment would ensure that they are able to receive emergency alerts over PEG channels without additional equipment or charges, and that these channels offer closed captioning in compliance with existing law and the new standard put forth in the underlying legislation.
When Baldwin offered the amendment, a point of order was raised over germaneness concerns and she agreed to offer and withdraw the amendment without a vote. Chairman of the committee, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), acknowledged Baldwin’s legitimate concerns and vowed to take up the matter in the near future.
A copy of Baldwin’s remarks, link to video of her remarks, and embed code follow:
Statement of Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)
Energy and Commerce Committee
In Support of the CAP Act as an Amendment to H.R. 3101,
The Twenty-first Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act
July 21, 2010
Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk….I understand that a question of germaneness has been raised with my amendment, so I’d like to offer this amendment and make my arguments with the intention of withdrawing it. Mr. Chairman, there is a good case to be made as to why we should tackle the serious challenges facing Public, Educational, and Governmental – known as PEG – channels. I hope that I might receive assurances from you that our Committee will take up PEG issues in the near future…
I offer this amendment because of my concerns that Mr. Markey’s legislation may not be complete without including our PEG channels in his productive effort to ensure Americans with disabilities can fully access existing and emerging technologies.
As my colleagues may know, there are over 2,000 PEG studios and an estimated 5,000 PEG channels in America. In a day of media consolidation, these local, non-commercial access channels bring unique voices, perspectives, and programming to communities.
They also serve as a lifeline to Americans with disabilities—helping people stay connected and fully participate in our democracy. PEG channels provide an opportunity for individuals with mobility issues to monitor and engage in their local government, take distance learning classes, find out what services are available to them in the community, and even participate in church worship services. While we strive for digital inclusion, we must protect and enhance the existing access to news and civic life available through PEG channels.
My amendment would accomplish three simple things:
First, it would clarify that the captioning obligations in the Twenty-first Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act will not relieve providers of PEG channels from meeting the same standards that are required of broadcasters.
For example, AT&T does not offer PEG channels like other cable operators do—they group all PEG channels in a certain region on Channel 99, which works through an onscreen menu-driven system. A person with a vision impairment may have challenges using Channel 99 without assistance because of the way the onscreen menu works.
Further, AT&T does not offer closed captioning on Channel 99 or any of the PEG channels it carries—it only offers “open captioning” which scrolls like a CNN ticker. As many people with disabilities know, this is a real problem for those communities who require closed captioning and/or second language captioning.
My amendment would require providers of PEG channels to meet the same standards that are required of broadcasters and clarify companies like AT&T are not in compliance with existing law—let alone the new standard put forth in the underlying legislation.
Second, my amendment would ensure that Americans with disabilities can rely on their PEG channels for emergency alerts. Unfortunately, some cable companies have started moving PEG channels to a digital-only tier where they are completely inaccessible to analog cable customers—placing an unnecessary burden on low income and fixed income individuals and families, and people with disabilities.
For example, in Texas, Time Warner has begun sending notices to cities letting them know that as of August 5—amidst hurricane season—PEG channels will be moved from their current analog format to a digital format. If consumers want to view PEG channels after August 5th, they will have to obtain a converter box at an additional charge.
Finally, my amendment will update existing law to allow communities to use PEG support in whatever manner best serves that community, including using funds to hire personnel.
This amendment is based on my Community Access Preservation (CAP) Act, H.R. 3745, which has the endorsement of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, the Alliance for Community Media and the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors.
I firmly believe that by strengthening our PEG channels, we are fulfilling the promise of Mr. Markey’s goal to ensure Americans with disabilities have full access to every means of communication available now and into the future.
As I mentioned at the beginning of my statement, I intend to withdraw this amendment. But I am hopeful that this Committee will soon turn its attention to the challenges faced by PEG channels in our ever changing telecommunications environment.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Video link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umavwCbkAMM
