The story of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and its aftermath

The attachment of this COMMON CAUSE article, written a few short years ago will tell you the story of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and its aftermath.

The political environment may have slightly changed since 2005, but if Republicans
were to gain a stronger footing, community media, public access, and the ownership of the rights of way that allow cable and phone companies to profit from along with our right to participate and control such ways will be lost. Adding republican seats may continue the devastating trends revealed in this report. Thanks to William Houston for passing it on to us and to Common Cause the source of the report.
regulatory control does not always translate to bigger government.In the case of telecommunications and maintaining local cable franchises and support for public access television/community media, it can mean empowerment to the people.

I strongly recommend the following read for anyone in a capacity to officiate over cable regulations, municipal decisions regarding local franchising, public access advocates and committee members who may be involved in community ascertainment processes. See the link to the entire pdf.

On the the report:

The Telecom Act failed to serve the public and did not deliver on its promise of more competition, more diversity, lower prices, more jobs and a booming economy.
Instead, the public got more media concentration, less diversity, and higher prices.
Over 10 years, the legislation was supposed to save consumers $550 billion, including $333 billion in lower long-distance rates, $32 billion in lower local phone rates, and $78 billion in lower cable bills. But cable rates have surged by about 50 percent, and local phone rates went up more than 20 percent.

Industries supporting the new legislation predicted it would add 1.5 million jobs and boost the economy by $2 trillion. By 2003, however, telecommunications’ companies’ market value had fallen by about $2 trillion, and they had shed half a million jobs. And study after study has documented that profit-driven media conglomerates are investing less in news and information, and that local news in particular is failing to provide viewers with the information they need to participate in their democracy Why did this happen? In some cases, industries agreed to the terms of the Act and then went to court to block them.

By leaving regulatory discretion to the Federal Communications Commission, the Act gave the FCC the power to issue rules that often sabotaged the intent of Congress. Control of the House passed from Democrats to Republicans, more sympathetic to corporate arguments for deregulation. And while corporate special interests all had a seat at the table when this bill was being negotiated, the public did not. Nor were average citizens even aware of this legislation’s great impact on how they got their entertainment and information, and whether it would foster or discourage diversity of viewpoints and a marketplace of ideas, crucial to democratic discourse.