Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
472802213
label
Cable Letters (JAB) [James A. Baker]
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
472802213
contentType
document
title
Cable Letters (JAB) [James A. Baker]
identifierLocal
93003-011
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Chief of Staff to the President (George H. W. Bush Administration)
James A. Baker III Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
472802213
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
a364033de8c80806
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s): FOIA Number: 2000-0715-F 2000-0715-F FOIA MARKER This is not a textual record. This is used as an administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential Library Staff. Record Group/Collection: George H.W. Bush Presidential Records Collection/Office of Origin: Chief of Staff, White House Office of Series: Baker, James A., III, Files Subseries: Legislative Files OA/ID Number: 93003 Folder ID Number: 93003-011 Folder Title: Cable Letters (JAB) [James A. Baker] Stack: Row: Section: Shelf: Position: G 0 0 0 0 Barbara, The "mass mailing du jour" appears to be these letters to JAB & Director Darman re: cable bill. When you have a minute will you call me re: these? Thanks! Caron J. 9/28 -- 4:45pm SEP-25-1992 15:38 FROM PEOPLE'S CHOICE T.V. TO 12023953746 P.01 People's Choice-TV® September 25, 1992 The Honorable James Baker Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the office of Management and Budget old Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20503 Gentlemen: After twenty years as a successful cable executive, I am writing to you as President and Chief Operating Officer of People's Choice TV Partners, the largest holder of wireless frequencies in the United States. The wireless cable industry was created by the Federal Communications Commission in 1983 to compete with the traditional cable television industry. It has strong bi-partisan support in both Houses of Congress. We use broadcast microwave technology to deliver video services from satellite programming and off-air broadcasting to home consumers. The President states that he is for competition and against govenment regulation of the marketplace. I praise him for that position. In light of this I'm asking you for your support of S. 12 and your influence on the President not to veto this consumer favored legislation. We have launched a highly successful wireless system in Tucson, Arizona and soon plan to expand to the major market areas of Houston, St. Louis, Kansas City, Baltimore and Knoxville. The partners in our company have invested over $40 million of their own funds thus far. People's Choice TV's efforts to serve the Tucson TV viewer with service quality has been very successful. In July, 1992, we commissioned a customer satisfaction study by one of the most highly respected research firms in the country, Malarkey-Taylor Associates. Fifty-nine (59) percent of People's Choice TV customers rated our service excellent overall V6 only twenty-seven (27) percent of cable customers in the same market rating their cable service. People's Choice TV Partners, 201 S Wilmot Rd_ Tucson, AZ 85711 TEL (602) 750-7300 FAX (602) 747-0832 SEP-25-1992 15:39 FROM PEOPLE'S CHOICE T.V. TO 12023953746 P.02 Page 2, I'm proud of what the wireless industry is accomplishing, not only in Tucson, but throughout the country. Prior to 1989, satellite cable programmers threatened by cable monopolies (which also own or control many satellite programmers) refused to sell us programming. Congress began to investigate and proposed legislative solutions, culminating in overwhelming passage of these two bills, S. 12 and H.R. 4850. This has now opened the door to competitors by making programming available. The industry has been able to provide a choice for consumers in over 110 markets, resulting in monthly rates on an average of 30% below cable. In spite of the anti-competitive conduct of the cable industry, close to half a million American homes are benefiting from this competitive service. Without the strong access to programming language in this legislation, there can be no real competition. I ask that you recognize the real consumer benefits which will be lost if the President vetoes this legislation. The future of the wireless industry depends on the President's support of this legislation. Many entrepreneurial dollars and jobs of people who took risks would be lost, including mine. I strongly. believe that the right thing for consumers is for the President not to veto this pro-competitive consumer legislation. Please suppport this. Thank you. Will Sincerely, W. Hipple, III Chief Operating Officer TOTAL P.02 RANSWORLD TELECOMMUNICATIONS The Honorable James A Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the Office of Management and Budget Old Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20503 September 25, 1992 Dear Gentlemen: In your counseling capacity to President Bush, I feel compelled to write you in order that you understand the consequences to the American public if President Bush vetoes Bill S.12. I trust that you will convey this message to the President. Knowing that the President is pro-competition and against government regulation of the marketplace, it is imperative that he realize the net effect of a Presidential veto in the most important consumer legistation of the decade. The net result to the consumer in the 110 cities across America in which there is a Wireless television system competing with cable is a 28-30% price benefit. There are potentially hundreds of Wireless television systems in the planning stages all across America. The significant point of this legislation is the pro-competition access to programming provision. Without the passage of S.12, we will not have codified into law the necessary programming provision access in order to provide our competitive service. Without effective competition, the cable monopoly will continue unchecked, and the American consumer can expect the same unconscionable price increases and poor service as they have experienced in the past. Please have the President consider the American consumer and not veto Bill S.12. Thank you. Lave Respectfully da submitted, Lance D'Ambrosio President LD/pc WORLDWIDE COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE 175 S. Main Street, Suite 450 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 801-328-5621 Fax 801-532-6060 Sep. 25 '92 16:01 0000 SANFAX515Hseries P. 1 RANSWORLD TELECOMMUNICATIONS The Honorable James A Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Monorable Richard G. Darman Director of the office of Management and Budget old Executive office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20503 September 25, 1992 Dear Gentlemen: In your counseling capacity to President Bush, I feel compelled to write you in order that you understand the consequences to the American public if President Bush vetoes Bill S.12. I trust that you will convey this message to the president. knowing that the President is pro-competition and against government regulation of the marketplace, it is imperative that he realize the net effect of a Presidential veto in the most important consumer legistation of the decade. The net result to the consumer in the 110 cities across America in which there is a Wireless television system competing with cable is a 20-30% price benefit. There are potentially hundreds of Wireless television systems in the planning stages all across America. The significant point of this legislation is the pro-competition access to programming provision. Without the passage of 6.12, we will not have codified into law the necessary programming provision access in order to provide our competitive service. Without effective competition, the cable monopoly will continue unchecked, and the American consumer can expect the same unconscionable price increases and poor service as they have experienced in the past. Please have the President consider the American consumer and not veto Bill 8.12. Thank you. Respectfully submitted, faver Lance D'Ambrosio President LD/pc. WORLDWIDE COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE FUTURE 175 S. Main Street, Suite 450 # Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 801-328-5621 Fax 801-532-6060 TRANSWORLD WIRELESS TELEVISION Television for a New Generation The Honorable James A Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the Office of Management and Budget Old Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20503 September 25, 1992 Dear Gentlemen: In your counseling capacity to President Bush, I feel compelled to write you in order that you understand the consequences to the American public if President Bush vetoes Bill S.12. I trust that you will convey this message to the President. Knowing that the President is pro-competition and against government regulation of the marketplace, it is imperative that he realize the net effect of a Presidential veto in the most important consumer legistation of the decade. The net result to the consumer in the 110 cities across America in which there is a Wireless television system competing with cable is a 28-30% price benefit. There are potentially hundreds of Wireless television systems in the planning stages all across America. The significant point of this legislation is the pro-competition access to programming provision. Without the passage of S.12, we will not have codified into law the necessary programming provision access in order to provide our competitive service. Without effective competition, the cable monopoly will continue unchecked, and the American consumer can expect the same unconscionable price increases and poor service as they have experienced in the past. Please have the President consider the American consumer and not veto Bill S.12. Thank you. Respectfully submitted, Pat Blanchard Pat Blanchard President Pb/sc BUSINESS COMMONS 1790 BONANZA DRIVE SUITE 212 C P.O. BOX 680488 PARK CITY, UTAH 84068-0488 801-649-1986 FAX 801-645-9498 Sep. 25 '92 16:00 0000 SANFAX515Hseries P. 1 TRANSWORLD WIRELCSS TELEVISION Television for a New Generation The Honorable James A Baker III and Chief of Staff to the President The Honorable Richard G. Darman Old Director of the Office of Management and Budget Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20503 September 25, 1992 Dear Gentlemen: write In your counseling in capacity to President Bush, I feel American you order that you understand the compelled to you will public if President Bush vetoes Bill consequences S.12. I trust to that the convey this message to the President. government Knowing that the President is pro-competition and realize the regulation of the marketplace, it is imperative against consumer legistation net effect of of the a Presidential decade. veto in the most important that he which The net there result to the consumer in the 110 cities a 28-30% price is a benefit. Wireless television system competing across with America cable is in the There planning are potentially stages all hundreds across America. of Wireless television systems in access The significant to point of this legislation is the will not have programming provision. Without the pro-competition of access in codified into law the necessary programming passage provision S.12, we order to provide our competitive service. unchecked, Without effective competition, the cable monopoly will unconscionable and the American consumer can continue experienced price increases and poor service expect as they the have same in the past. veto Please Bill have S.12. the President consider the American consumer and not Thank you. Respectfully submitted, Put Pat Blanchard Blandhard President Pb/sc BUSINESS COMMONS 1790 BONANZA DRIVE SUITE 212 C P.O. BOX 680488 PARK CITY, UTAH 84068-0488 801-649-1986 FAX 801-645-9498 09. 25. 92 04:08 PM *MICROBAND COMPANIES P01 MA The Microband Companies Incorporated MICROBAND 286 Eldridge Road Fairfield, New Jersey 07004 (201) 227-6700 Fax: (201) 227-2612 Facsimile Cover Sheet # Pages: Date: 9/25/92 3 (Inclusing this page) Mr. James Baker To: Mr. Richard Darman Fax #: 202-395-3746 Location: The White House From: J. Patrick Dugan Phone: 201-808-3702 We are transmitting from a Fujitsu Dex Express 6300. Special Instructions/Comments: 09. 25. 92 04:08 PM *MICROBAND COMPANTES P02 MICROBAND September 25, 1992 J. Patrick Dugen President & CEO Mr. James Baker Chief of Staff The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D.C. 20050 Dear Mr. Baker: Re: S.12 - The Cable Consumer Protection Bill I urge you to recommend that President Bush sign S.12. The cable TV industry is an unregulated monopoly. Period. End of story. Therefore, a little regulation and a large boost for competitive forces. as in S.12, are exactly what is needed; even staunch conservatives can't -- or shouldn't - object to this minimal regulation of a monopoly: (1) The so-called price regulation in S.12 is de minimus; only "basic" channels are covered, thus leaving the more popular channels such as ESPN, TNT, USA, etc. open to virtually unregulated price increases by the cable companies, and (2) The supposed cost to cable TV for retransmission of local off-air channels is a Trojan horse at best; the cable companies will refuse and the local TV stations will have no choice but to back down. Do you really believe giant companies like TCI and Time Warner and the others are going TO allow any such cost escalation to happen? I believe they'll just drop the signals from their line-up and let the consumer get them from "off-the-air" (very easily done in most places, by the way). On the other hand, the equal access to programming provision, the heart of this legislation, will be a big boost to satellite cable, private cable, and wireless cable in their efforts to compete with the entrenched CATV monopoly -- and competition is by far the best way to "regulate." Accordingly, I urge you to resist the power and influence of the cable TV lobbyists and PACs and support the consumer's side of this issue by supporting S.12. Lastly, speaking not as an executive of the wireless cable industry but, rather, as a voter who wants very much for President Bush to be re-elected, I urge you to not risk, so late in the campaign, the President's first-ever veto override on this legislation, which will successfully be portrayed by the Democrats (particularly Senator Gore who spearheaded this legislation in the Senate) as pro-consumer, pro-competition, pro-education, and anti- CATV monopoly (all of which are true). J: Patrick Dugan THE MICROBANO COMPANIES INCORPORATED 258 ELDRIDGE ROAD FAIRRELD. NEW JERSEY 07004 501 297 9700 09. 25. 92 04:08 PM *MICROBAND COMPANIES P03 MICROBAND September 25, 1992 J. Patrick Dugan President & CEO Mr. Richard Darman, Director Office of Management and Budget The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D.C. 20050 Dear Mr. Darman: Re: S.12 The Cable Consumer Protection Bill I urge you to recommend that President Bush sign S.12. The cable TV industry is an unregulated monopoly. Period. End of story. Therefore, a little regulation and a large boost for competitive forces, as in S.12, are exactly what is needed; even staunch conservatives can't -- or shouldn't -- object to this minimal regulation of a monopoly: (1) The so-called price regulation in S.12 is de minimus; only "basic" channels are covered, thus leaving the more popular channels such as ESPN, TNT, USA, etc. open to virtually unregulated price increases by the cable companies, and (2) The supposed cost to cable TV for retransmission of local off-air channels is a Trojan horse at best; the cable companies will refuse and the local TV stations will have no choice but to back down. Do you really believe giant companies like TCI and Time Warner and the others are going to allow any such cost escalation to happen? I believe they'll just drop the signals from their line-up and let the consumer get them from "off-the-air" (very easily done in'most places, by the way). On the other hand, the equal access to programming provision. the heart of this legislation. will be a big boost to satellite cable, private cable, and wireless cable in their efforts to compete with the entrenched CATV monopoly -- and competition is by far the best way to "regulate." Accordingly, I urge you to resist the power and influence of the cable TV lobbyists and PACs and support the consumer's side of this issue by supporting S.12. Lastly, speaking not as an executive of the wireless cable industry but, rather, as a voter who wants very much for President Bush to be re-elected, I urge you to not risk, so late in the campaign, the President's first-ever veto override on this legislation, which will successfully be portrayed by the Democrats (particularly Senator Gore who spearheaded this legislation in the Senate) as pro-consumer, pro-competition, pro-education, and anti- CATV monopoly (all of which are true). J. Patrick Dugan THE MICROBANO COMPANIES INCORPORATED 288 ELDROGE FOAD FAIRFIELD. NEW JERSEY 07004 201 227 6700 CCA WIRELESS CABLE ASSOCIATION, INC. Wireless Cable 2000 L Street, NW * Suite 702 * Washington, DC 20036 * Association (202) 452-7823 * Fax (202) 452-0041 * September 24, 1992 The Honorable James A. Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the Office of Management and Budget Old Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20503 Gentlemen: It is with great concern and anxiety that prompts the writing of this important message to you who are counseling President Bush in these difficult election times. I am a businessman who believes the President when he says he is for competition and against government regulation of the marketplace. I salute him for that philosophical position. At considerable financial risk, I personally have built a competitive wireless cable system in the Bakersfield, California market, which has brought an important alternative choice to consumers. The net benefit of our business proves the President's point on competition, for in those 110 cities where wireless cable is competing, consumers receive 28-30% price benefit now. Unfortunately, gentlemen, now is where my concern and anxiety take over in this message. Without the passage of S. 12, we will not have codified into law the necessary programming access in order to provide our competitive service. It is true that we have most of the programming today, thanks to the jaw-boning by the Congress, FCC, and States Attorneys General-even if prices, terms, and conditions for that programming is sometimes 200-300% greater than cable distributors' prices. The point is that the significant part of this legislation is the pro-competition access to programming provision and that will be lost if the President successfully vetoes this legislation. Do the right thing for American consumers and competition. Don't veto this legislation. Sincerely, Robert L. Schmidt President RLS/lkm WIRELESS CABLE ASSOCIATION, INC. WINSTON CHING PM Wireless Cable 2000 L Street, NW * Suite 702 * Washington, DC 20036 * Association SEP25'92 26058 1997 D.C 5311062 U.S. POSTAGE The Honorable James A. Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the Office of Management and Budget Old Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20503 266 P02 SEP 25 '92 15:35 WCA WIRELESS CABLE of ATLANTA September 25, 1992 The Honorable James A. Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the Office of Management and Budget Old Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20503 Gentlemen: It is with great concern and anxiety that prompts the writing of this important message to you who are counseling Bush in these difficult election times. I am a businessman who believes the President when he says he is for competition against government regulation of the marketplace. I salute him for that philosophical position. At considerable financial risk, I personally have built a competitive wireless cable system in the Atlanta, Georgia market, which has brought an important alternative choice to consumers. The net benefit of our business proves the President's point on competition, for those 110 citles where wireless cable Is competing, consumers receive 28-30% price benefit now. Unfortunately, gentlemen, now is where my concern and anxiety take over in this message, Without the passage of S. 12, we will not have codified into law the necessary programming access in order to provide our competitive service. It Is true that we have most of the programming today, thanks to the jaw-boning by the Congress, FCC, and States Attorneys General-even if prices, terms, and conditions for that programming is sometimes 200-300% greater than cable distributors' prices. The point is that the significant part of this legislation is the pro-competition access to programming provision and that will be lost if the President successfully vetoes this legislation. Do the right thing for American consumers and competition. Don't veto this legislation. Sincerely Richard L. Kendrick Chief Executive Officer 3100 Medlock Bridge Road. Suite 360 Norcross, Georgia 30071-1437 (404) 449-0955 / Fax: (404) 449-0955 Ext. 122 266 P01 SEP 25 '92 15:35 WIRELESS CABLE OF ATLANTA FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET Date Sent: 9-25-92 Time Sent: Pm Deliver To: James A. Baker III 11) Company/Firm: Chief of Staff to the President Fax Number: (202) 395- 3746 Number of Pages: d Sent From: Richard L. Kendrick Sender's Telephone Number: (404) 449-0955 Extension: 107 Sender's Fax Number: (404) 449-0955 Extension: 122 Message/Comments: The original or this transmitted document will be sent by: 1 First Class Mail Messenger Overnight Mail This will be the only form of delivery. If contact you do not receive the entire transmission indicated please the operator at (404) 449-0955. 3100 Medlock Bridge Road - Suite 360 o Norcross. Georgia 30071-1439 . (404) 449-0955 SEP 25 '92 17:17 THREE-SIXTY CORP. P.2/6 THREE SIXTY CORP. 120 FLORALAVENUE NEW PROVIDENCE, NJ 07074 (908) 085-0094 FAX# (000) 665-0343 September 25, 1992 The Honorable James A. Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the office of Management and Budget old Executive Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20503 Centlemen: I understand there has been indication by President Bush that he might to veto the recent cable bill that passed the Senate this week with a margin sufficient to override his veto. Votes in both the House and Senate were by such overwhelming non-partisan majorities that a clear mandate 1s present. The public, and those representing the public, can measure the same consumer benefits from this legislation that I see in it, i.e., stabilization of cable TV rates, and the provision of competition in the marketplace to weaken the strength of the cable monopoly. The Presidential veto would certainly fly in the face of such obvious logic. It would cause some to wonder why the President would take such a step. I wrote to the President earlier asking him to permit this legislation to become law when it arrived on his deck, however, my. influence on the process is about zero. yours may be considerable. I have also written to a number of Senators debunking the campaign put on by the cable industry to attempt to prove that this legislation would cost consumers more money. A copy of this is enclosed for your information. This legislation will benefit consumers all over this nation. The major players opposed to this legislation are the Cable Industry itself, and other vested interest parties whose arguments are extremely self-serving. My own interest could be construed to be self-serving, however, I am simply a little frog in a big pond. I am, however, in a position, by way of Wireless Cable competition, to benefit some of the 60 million cable consumers of this country. SEP 25 '92 17:18 THREE-SIXTY CORP. P.3/6 The Honorable James A. Baker III The Honorable Richard G. Darman September 25, 1992 Page Two Please do something for consumers, and not for big business interests. Advise the President to permit this legislation to become law. Thank you for your attention. very truly yours, Robert Bild Robert D. Bilodeau RDB/mme SEP 25 '92 17:18 THREE-SIXTY CORP. P.4/6 THREE SIXTY CORP. 120 FLORAL AVENUE NEW PROVIDENCE, MJ07874 (903) 065-0094 FAX # (000) 665-0843 September 21, 1992 Dear Senator: I am aware that the Cable Industry is putting on a "nard passed by the House last week by a margin of 280 to 128, I am also press" to convince you to vote against the Cable Re-rogulation court Bill a aware "veto that the Benate passed an almost identical bill previously acting again in like fashion. proof" margin. I therefore look forward to the Senate by misinformation to the public about certain aspects of the bill. sends defeat the legislation. It is utilizing a campaign that help The cable industry is also using its subscriber base to of an example of this misinformation, I have enclosed a reduced As by TeleCommunications, Inc., the local Corpus Christi, Texas paid a full page Corpus Christi Caller Times advertisement copy for company. The ad implies that major newspapers in the US cable are likewise against this legislation. this the New York Times, you might believe that The Times is to with respect to the view attributable by Telecommunications legislation! However, the New York Times editorial opposed to September that 14, the day before this TCI ad appeared, clearly of President Bush's likely veto," "the bill deserves enthusiastic support, enough to overcome states marketplace. attempted to railroad Congress's effort towards competition in the This is yet another example of how the cable industry has Very truly yours, RBLL Robert D. Bilodeau A Wireless cable Operator, waiting for the truth to surface. RDB/mme Enclosure Corpue the Caller Wines HELP / Below are what some Congress is wielding such a heavy of the top papers in the country hand that instead of reducing rates, have to-say about the Cable it could end up costing cable Bill It's not nery subscribers. flattering Ajier all if it passes, cable 16567S -Chicago Tribune williend. paying $2 to $4 "It's a poorly written and a.month more for exactly contradictory piece of legislation: whit theyre getting now. We adorned with 80 many gimmicks feel this bill is wrong If you agree, that it resembles a Christmas tree please call or write your Senator decorated with items from the or Omgressmon They'll be unlino local junkyard." very som. -The Denver Post It is hard to imagine that the federal government can adjudicate this process in any manner but "The Cable Reregulation Bill has to drag out the pain and delay the become a consumer's nightmare unfolding of a wondrous and a lobbyist's dream technological epach" The Wall Street Tournal -The Atlanta Journal a Public discontent with cable this bill etill includes provisions that are anything but consumer prices hardly justifies the quasi protection. They are, in fact. require- nationalization of a whole industry. ments that consumers subsidize Were that the criteria, Washington cable television's competitors." would be running everything from autos to hospitals." -Saint Paul Pioneer Press -The Cincinnati Past "Viewers will need to beware, The threat is that costly regulations will U.S. Senate force local authorities to grant large Washington, DC 20620 rate hikes, or force cable companies (202)224-3121 to cut ser vice and put off Investment U.S. House of Representatives in new ser vice." mushington, D.C. 20515 (202)825-3121 -The Now York Times SEP 25 '92 17:19 THREE-SIXTY CORP. P.6/6 A18 L THE NAW YORK TIMES EDITORIALS ARTHUR DONE DULZEEPOUR JR., Publisher MAX FRANKEL, Executive Editor JOBBRN LELTYDER, Managing instrur WARREN HOCE, Assistant Managing Eddor DAVID k JONES. Assistant Managing Kditor CAROLYN LEE. Accistant Muraging Estion JOHN LEE, Assistant Menaging Editor The New York Times ALLAN SIEGAL Assistant Managing Editor ECTIONAL Editorial Page Bditos PEILIP M.HOFFEY. Deputy Editorial Page Editor Nounded in 1851 LANGE R. FRIMIS. President and Conanal Manager 100LPH 8.OCHS Publisher 1890-1935 RUSSELL T. LEWIS. Executive V.P. Deputy Gen. Mgr. ANTHUR HAYS SINZRERGER, Publisher 1035 1081 JOHN M. Y.P. Deputy Gen. segn. GRVIL E.ERYFOODS. Publisher 1061.1063 WILLIAM L POLLAR, Executive V.P. Sales AMHUR OCHS SULZBERGER, Publisher 1983-1992 JAMES 4, CUTTE, Sr. V.P, Marketing ERICH & LINKER JR. Sr. V.P. Aducatising RICHARD H. GILMAN. V.P.. Systems and Technology MEDICAL AMOUNT V.F, Human Reseurces KAREN A MEDEINED, VP, Controller JOSEPH M.MULLEN, V.P. Production CHARLES M.SHELTON V.H. Charalation A Fine-Tuned Cable Bill The lolks who bring you cable television have would also allow the F.C.C. to veto rate bikes for a furious campaign to scuttle legislation more expensive services. but only if the proposed that would re-regulate their industry. The House rates would be excrbitant. The nill would also Kind Senate have proposed giving authorities the enable cable's potential competitors, like satellite right to reduce monthly cable charges. But the broadcasters and "wireless" systems, to acquire table operators say the legislatton-would have the cable programs at fair-market rates. opposite effect, driving prices up by parhaps $50 a The original versions would have subjected year, by imposing onerous regulations. cable operators to costly reviews of even minor rate The cable operators have exaggerated the hikes by Lens of thousands of local authorities. But costs and conducted a misicading advertising cam- the conference bill empowers the F.C.C. to waive paign to scare customers. They once had a point: routine reviews. The House and Senate versions were heavy-handed The conference bill would require cable compa- and needlessly eastly. But then conferees pruned nics to install devices that would give customers much of the excess. Whar's emerged is 0 responsi- flexibility to decide which services to buy. But the ble bill, up for vote this work, that would rein in bill provides an ample deagine - 10 years - and agregious price hikes for basic service and open up allows the F.C.C. to waive the requirement for small the industry to potential competitors. companies serving low-Income viewers. The bill does contain one potentially destruc- tive giveaway. To gain political support, sponsors When Congress lifted price controls in 1984, weable companies socked customers with whopping gave broadcasters the right to charge cable campa- nies for retransmitting local programs. The danger price hikes. some were justified, reflecting the cost of new service or catch-up after years of punitive 18 that retransmission fees could loom large, threat- ening subscribers with large rate likes or dimin- rate setting by local authorities. But many in- ished offerings. creases constituted monopoly exploitation. Over all, the hill deserves enthusiastic support, The conference bill would require the Federal enough to overcome President Bush's likely voto. Communications Commission to set guidelines for Under the conference bill, the only people who need the price of basic service. like retransmission of fear the legislation are those who've grown smug network programs and public access channels. It overcharging captive audiences. SEP 25 '92 17:16 THREE-SIXTY CORP. P.1/6 THREE SIXTY CORP DATE: 9/25 ) 1992 TO: James 9. Baher LOCATION: Chul of wood LIBERTY Staff to the President CARLE TV-ATLANTIC DOM'S WCTV. OMNIVISION CLEARVIEW FROM: Robert I Belodeau LOCATION: Three Sixty Corp. PAGES: 6 including Cover Sheet OUR FAX #: 908 - 665 - 0343 SPEC INSTRUCTIONS NOTES V MMMM IF YOU HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE COMPLETE FAX, PLEASE CALL: 909 - 665 0004 THREE SIXTY CORP 120 FLORAL AVE, NEW PROVIDENCE, N.J. 07974 CONIFER ® TELECOMMUNICATION PRODUCTS September 25, 1992 The Honorable James A. Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the Office of Management and Budget Old Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D. C. 20500 Dear Gentlemen: The President's recent campaign platform has promised further fostering of small business. At Conifer Corporation we design and manufacture high-tech electronic products for the Wireless Cable and Instructional Television (educational TV) industries. Institutions of higher education along with all public and private schools can benefit from our products and services. In addition we export a significant percentage of our products. But our main business is to supply reception equipment to wireless cable operators around the country who are trying to offer a choice to the American consumer. If the President's veto of S. 12 is successful, not only will it seriously stunt the growth of our customers, and consequently the growth of our company, but it will also jeopardize our very livelihood. Do the right thing for American consumers and competition. Don't veto this legislation. The 125 Proud Employees of Conifer By It's President Corporation Toming John T. von Harz CONIFER CORP P.O. BOX 1025 1400 N. ROOSEVELT BURLINGTON, IOWA 52601 (319) 752-3607 FAX 319-753-5508 ACS ENTERPRISES, INC. September 25, 1992 ALAN SONNENBERG CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD / CEO The Honorable James A. Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the Office of Management and Budget Old Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D.C. 20503 Gentlemen: I am a Wireless Cable operator, serving the Philadelphia metropolitan area with an alternative method to receive cable programming. Without the passage of the current cable bill, 2, 200, 000 households will be denied our service. President Bush has repeatedly stated that he is pro-competition. However, without access to programming, at fair and reasonable terms, we cannot offer our service, which on the average saves the consumer 35% per year. Where I can understand that additional government regulation creates some burden, the country is better off with the passage of S. 12, as it is right now, then without it. In retrospect, it may have been better for the Administration to work closer with Congress to develop the real points needed to encourage competition. It did not happen. I, myself, on many occasions, tried to meet with various Presidential Advisors, to try to explain not just the reality of wireless, but what we offer the consumer. If this legislation is vetoed, I strongly believe not only will it demolish the efforts of competition to the cable monopoly, but as an active Republican, I am afraid that it will put the President in a much lesser light to the voters. Unfortunately, the President is fighting a difficult battle with Governor Clinton. I have been a supporter and believer in the President in this difficult election. Because Senator Gore has specifically had such an active position, over the years, regarding this issue with the cable companies, without any hesitation, I am convinced that this will be the icing on the cake that President Bush will not be able to overcome if he vetoes this legislation. For my business, for the country, and for President Bush's reelection, I can only recommend that this legislation is not vetoed because the negative aspects perceived by the Administration with the bill are not as bad as with out. Very truly yours, ACS ENTERPRISES, INC. Alan Sonnenberg Chairman of the Board/CEO AS/laj 2064 STATE ROAD, BENSALEM, PA 19020 215/245-4900 800/972-1200 FAX 215/245-5254 SM METRATEN 5400 Transportation Boulevard Garfield Heights, Ohio 44125 CABLEVISION 216/662-7125 Fax: 216/662-7165 September 28, 1992 The Honorable James A. Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the Office of Management and Budget Old Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, DC 20503 Gentlemen: I continue to become seriously concerned regarding President Bush's threatened veto of the cable bill. I understand and agree with his desire to reduce regulation, but in this instance he is on the wrong track. The cable television industry today is an unregulated monopoly with virtually no competition. Recently we all saw a result of that monopoly power which is far more disturb- ing than their ability to raise rates at whim. Look at the flood of protest they generated with disinformation campaign the waged against the cable bill. Just think of the consequences if that power is left unchecked and is used to influence other public policy for the benefit of the few individuals who control the industry. The President is right, competition is the answer to controlling this runaway monopo- ly. If you look at markets where competition exists from wireless cable, you will see cable rates are up to 30% less than those in uncompetitive markets. However competition will not develop without access to programming. The cable reregualation bill has an important pro-competition programming access provision which guarantees competitors fair and equal access to necessary programming. Unless S.12 becomes law, the programming competitors need to stay in business will not become avail- able. I urge you, please support competition. Do not veto this bill. Sincerely, PaR President A service of Metropolitan Cablevision, Inc. SEP-28-92 MON 9:52 FAX NO. 2166627165 P. 01/01 SM 5400 Transportation Boulevard Garfield Heights, Ohio 44125 CABLEVISION 216/662-7126 Fax: 216/662-7165 September 28, 1992 The Honorable James A. Baker III Chief of Staff to the President and The Honorable Richard G. Darman Director of the Office of Management and Budget Old Executive Office Building 17th Street and Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, DC 20503 Gentlemen: I continue to become seriously concerned regarding President Bush's threatened veto of the cable bill. I understand and agree with his desire to reduce regulation, but in this instance he is on the wrong track. The cable television industry today is an unregulated monopoly with virtually no competition. Recently we all saw a result of that monopoly power which is far more disturb- ing than their ability to raise rates at whim. Look at the flood of protest they generated with disinformation campaign the waged against the cable bill. Just think of the consequences if that power is left unchecked and is used to influence other public policy for the benefit of the few individuals who control the industry. The President is right, competition is the answer to controlling this runaway monopo- 1y. If you look at markets where competition exists from wireless cable, you will see cable rates are up to 30% less than those in uncompetitive markets. However competition will not develop without access to programming. The cable reregualation bill has an important pro-competition programming access provision which guarantees competitors fair and equal access to necessary programming. Unless S.12 becomes law, the programming competitors need to stay in business will not become avail- able. I urge you, please support competition. Do not veto this bill. Sincerely, Robert Patterson President A service of Metropolitan Cablevision, Inc. TBN Trinity Broadcasting Network International Headquarters Mr. James Baker Trinity Broadcasting Network White House Chief of Staff 2442 Michelle Drive Old Executive Office Building Tustin, California 92680 White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, D.C. 20500 Paul F. Crouch President and Founder Norman G. Juggert General Counsel Colby M. May Communications Counsel Trinity Broadcasting Network Jay A. Sekulow Chief Litigation Counsel September 29, 1992 Office of the President The President The White House Washington, D.C. 20500. Dear Mr. President: Thank you for your prompt response of September 11 concerning the Cable Consumer Protection Act, i.e., Senate Bill S-12 and House Bill HR 4850. It is clear from your response that you still have not focused on a serious inequity which this bill seeks to redress. You are correct that deregulation has fostered a multi-billion dollar expansion of cable TV which has generated many new programs for consumers. But in the process cable has become an unregulated monopoly--indeed the GATE KEEPER to the TV homes of America! Mr. President, please hear me as I speak for the many independent as well as religious TV broadcasters. Remember, we were here first. We, too, have invested billions into free, through the air broadcasting services. All we ask is access to ONE CHANNEL to reach the homes that we are mandated to serve by the FCC within our cities of license. But in many cases cable has DENIED us this access! Herein is the outrageous inequity of cable's monopoly. We broadcasters have only ONE channel within our cities of license. Cable has typically 35 to 100 channels. When they deny us even one cable channel, they preclude our ability to reach our viewers. Indeed, in some heavily cabled areas we are reduced to reaching as little as 10% of the viewers in our cities of license! How, sir, in heaven's name are we to serve our communities as required by the FCC so as to receive our license renewal viewers. expectancy every five years if cable denies us access to our Mr. President--GIVE US MUST CARRY OR WE WILL DIE! Please check your records. I am a lifelong loyal Republican and have personally contributed the maximum permitted by law to your campaign. I supported President Reagan as well as your Administration to the fullest extent possible. In fact, a special Trinity Broadcasting Network International Headquarters 2442 Michelle Drive Tustin, California 92680 (714) 832-2950 The President September 29, 1992 Page2 TV program is scheduled for broadcast over the Trinity Broadcasting Network on October 25 which will urge the Christians of America to vote. Dr. Bill Bright, Dr. Adrian Rogers, Rev. Charles Stanley, Dr. James Dobson, Rev. G. Raymond Carlson, and others have agreed to participate in this special program calling our nation to prayer and urging voters to compare all candidate's positions on the great moral and family issues of the day. In what promises to be a very close election all God fearing Americans must weigh their vote prayerfully. Mr. President, the evangelical Christian vote just might be the margin you will need to win. I am, however, in a most agonizing quandary. If you do, indeed, veto this cable bill, I will have no choice but to explain what happened to our viewers, and to express my profound disappointment. Trinity Broadcasting Network is rated by Arbitron as the number one religious service in America, with a weekly circulation of 26,000,000 regular viewers, nearly one-third of all TV households in America. I pray, Mr. President, that you will reconsider and allow this bill to pass since any monopoly, in the absence of competition, be it the phone company, power and light company, or cable TV must have a public utilities commission to regulate it for the good and protection of the public. My personal prayers and the prayers of millions of Christians are with you as you make a most difficult decision. God bless you. Respectfully yours, Paul Crouch Paul F. Crouch President PFC:mt XC: Vice President Dan Quayle Richard Bond - via telefax (202) 863-8774 Leigh Ann Metzger - via telefax (202) 456-1647 James Baker - via telefax ( 202) 456-2461 Richard Darman - via telefax (202) 395-3174 Charles Black via telefax (202) 336-7115 Fred Maleck via telefax (202) 336-7081 Robert Teeter - via telefax (202) 336-7090 Herb Ellingwood - via telefax (202) 336-7954 SEP 29 '92 16:44 TRINITY BRDRCASTNG P.1/3 Trinity Broadcasting Network 2442 Michelle Drive, Tustin. CA 91680 (714) 832-2950 TELEFAX COVER SHEET Date: 9-29-92 Time: To: Mr. James Baker Company: The White House FAX Number: ( 202 ) 456-2461 From: Paul F. Crouch Fax: ( 714 ) 730-0657 Phone: ( 714 ) 731-2300 MESSAGE: GF126 Total number of pages. including this cover sheet 3 PLEASE CALL If ALL PAGES ARE NOT RECEIVED SEP 29 '92 16:45 TRINITY BRDRCASTNG P.2/3 Paul F. Crouch President and Founder Norman G. Juggert General Counsel Colby M. May Communications Counsel Grinity Broadcasting Network Jay A. Sckulow Chief Lirigation Counsel September 29, 1992 Office of the President The President The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear Mr. President: Thank you for your prompt response of September 11 concerning the Cable Consumer Protection Act, i.e., Senate Bill S-12 and House Bill HR 4850. It is clear from your response that you still have not focused on a serious inequity which this bill seeks to redress. You are correct that deregulation has fostered a multi-billion dollar expansion of cable TV which has generated many new programs for consumers. But in the process cable has become an unregulated monopoly--indeed the GATE KEEPER to the TV homes of America! Mr. President, please hear me as I speak for the many independent as well as religious TV broadcasters. Remember, we were here first. We, too, have invested billions into free, through the air broadcasting services. All we ask is access to ONE CHANNEL to reach the homes that we are mandated to serve by the FCC within our cities of license. But in many cases cable has DENIED us this access! Herein is the outrageous inequity of cable's monopoly. We broadcasters have only ONE channel within our cities of license. Cable has typically 35 to 100 channels. When they deny us even one cable channel, they preclude our ability to reach our viewers. Indeed, in some heavily cabled areas We are reduced to reaching as little as 10% of the viewers in our cities of license! How, sir, in heaven's name are we to serve our communities as required by the FCC SQ as to receive our license renewal expectancy every five years if cable denies us access to our viewers. Mr. President--GIVE US MUST CARRY OR WE WILL DIE! Please check your records. I am a lifelong loyal Republican and have personally contributed the maximum permitted by law to your campaign. I supported President Reagan as well as your Administration to the fullest extent possible. In fact, a special Trinity Broadcasting Network International Headquarters 2442 Michelle Drive Tustin, California 92680 (714) 832-2950 SEP 29 '92 16:45 TRINITY BRDRCASTNG P.3/3 The President September 29, 1992 Page2 TV program is scheduled for broadcast over the Trinity Broadcasting Network on October 25 which will urge the Christians of America to vote. Dr. Bill Bright, Dr. Adrian Rogers, Rev. Charles Stanley, Dr. James Dobson, Rev. G. Raymond Carlson, and others have agreed to participate in this special program calling our nation to prayer and urging voters to compare all candidate's positions on the great moral and family issues of the day. In what promises to be a very close election all God fearing Americans must weigh their vote prayerfully. Mr. President, the to win. evangelical Christian vate just might be the margin you will need I am, however, in a most agonizing quandary. Tf. you do, indood, veto this cable bill, I will have no choice but to explain what happened to our viewers, and to express my profound disappointment. Trinity Broadcasting Network is rated by Arbitron as the number one religious service in America, with a weekly circulation of 26,000,000 regular viewers, nearly one-third of all TV households in America. I pray, Mr. President, that you will reconsider and allow this bill to pass since any monopoly, in the absence of competition, be it the phone company, power and light company, or cable TV must have a public utilities commission to regulate it for the good and protection of the public. My personal prayers and the prayers of millions of Christiano are with you as you make a most difficult decision. God bloss yeu. Respectfully Paul F. Crouch President PFC:mt XC: Herb Ellingwood - via telefax (202) 336-7954 Richard Bond via telefax (202) 003-8774 Leigh Ann Metzger - via telefax (202) 456-1647 James Baker - via telefax ( 202) 456-2461 Richard Darman - via telefax (202) 395-3174 Charles Black - via telefax (202) 336-7115 Fred Maleck - via telefax (202) 336-7081 Robert Teeter. - via telefax (202) 336-7090