S.833 - Cable Television Subscriber Protection Act of 1989101st Congress (1989-1990)
|Sponsor:||Sen. Metzenbaum, Howard M. [D-OH] (Introduced 04/18/1989)|
|Committees:||Senate - Commerce, Science, and Transportation|
|Latest Action:||Senate - 04/18/1989 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce. (All Actions)|
This bill has the status Introduced
Here are the steps for Status of Legislation:
Summary: S.833 — 101st Congress (1989-1990)All Information (Except Text)
Introduced in Senate (04/18/1989)
Cable Television Subscriber Protection Act of 1989 - Amends the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 to provide that a franchising authority shall be authorized to regulate the rates for the provision of basic cable service and for installing or renting cable receiving equipment if it finds that a cable system is not subject to effective competition. Presumes such effective competition if the cable community is served by more than one multichannel video programming distributor. Finds that a cable community shall be considered to be served by more than one multichannel video programming distributor (MVPD) if comparable video programming is available to at least 67 percent of the multichannel households from a competing MVPD and the number of households subscribing to programming services offered by such competing MVPD or combinations of MVPDs exceeds 30 percent of the multichannel households in the community. Requires MVPDs to be completely independent of one another in order to be included as competing MVPDs in the determination of the presence of effective competition. Presumes a cable system to be subject to effective competition if less than 30 percent of the households to which cable service is available subscribe to such service.
Requires a franchising authority authorized to regulate basic cable rates under such Act to periodically review its effective competition findings in order to assure such effective competition. Allows a cable operator who has been adversely affected by a finding by a franchising authority determining a lack of effective competition to seek judicial review according to procedures defined under such Act. Allows a court to set aside such a finding by a franchising authority if the cable operator demonstrates that the finding is not supported by substantial evidence. Requires the franchising authority to establish a method for such regulation.