Communications Law Commons^™

The Telecommunications Act Of 1996: Codifying The Digital Divide, Allen S. Hammond Iv

Federal Communications Law Journal

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 purports to ensure every American eventual access to advanced telecommunications networks and services, and more immediate access to basic telephone networks and services. This access is essential because it determines the ease with which Americans can acquire an education, obtain employment, control financial affairs, access emergency assistance, and participate in the political process. The interpretation and implementation of the 1996 Act is critical because there is an imminent danger that a large portion of society— in inner cities, near suburbs, and small towns— not be connected to the "national electronic nervous system." To ensure that …

Whither Unregulated Access Competition?, Clayton C. Miller

Federal Communications Law Journal

Book Review: Universal Service: Competition, Interconnection, and Monopoly in the Making of the American Telephone System, by Milton L. Mueller, Jr., MIT Press and AEI Press, 1997, 191 pages.

Section 254 Of The Telecommunications Act Of 1996: A Hidden Tax?, Nichole L. Millard

Federal Communications Law Journal

Congress has the sole power to levy and collect taxes. The Supreme Court has ruled that Congress may delegate this authority to administrative agencies so long as the will of Congress is clearly defined in the legislation. However, section 254 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 operates as an unconstitutional delegation of Congress' authority to tax. This legislation provides the FCC with unfettered discretion in defining the boundaries of universal service and the authority to mandate that all consumers of telecommunications services subsidize the cost for low-income and rural consumers, as well as schools, libraries, and health care providers.

Hanging Up On Consumers: Why The Fcc Cannot Stop Slamming In The New Telecommunications Market , Christopher R. Day

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Getting Wireless Carriers Wired For Less: An Argument For Federal Regulation Of Lec-Cmrs Interconnection Agreements, Derek Yeo

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Telecommunications Act Of 1996: 704 Of The Act And Protections Afforded The Telecommunications Provider In The Facilities Sitting Context, The, Peter M. Degnan, Scott A. Mclaren, Michael T. Tennant

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The Telecommunications Act of 1996, signed into law by President Clinton in February, addresses, among many other important subjects, some of the technical problems that have arisen from the increasing popularity of mobile communications. This article will provide an overview of the Act and will focus specifically on the protections afforded a telecommunications provider in § 704 of the Act.

Editor's Note, Randall W. Sifers

Federal Communications Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Bibliography, Kenneth L. Parker, Tania A. Hrickik

Federal Communications Law Journal

A Selected Bibliography on the Telecommunications Act of 1996

Digital Television And The Allure Of Auctions: The Birth And Stillbirth Of Dtv Legislation, Ellen P. Goodman

Federal Communications Law Journal

Although relatively few provisions of the 1996 Telecommunication Act relate to digital broadcast television, these provisions have contributed to the ongoing debate over assignment of spectrum for DTV uses. Attention to the disputed issues of DTV has accentuated the differences between methods of spectrum management: how spectrum should be assigned among various services and users, and what roles the FCC and Congress should play. Two camps have emerged from the controversy: one viewing spectrum as a commodity that should be assigned by auction, the other viewing spectrum as a resource that must be allocated according to strict technical criteria and …

The 1996 Telekommunikationsgesetz And The Telecommunications Act Of 1996: Toward More Competitive Markets In Telecommunications In Germany And The United States, Carl B. Kress

Federal Communications Law Journal

Following a worldwide trend of increased market competition in telecommunications, both the United States and Germany passed new legislation in 1996 aimed at liberalizing communications regulation. Germany passed the Telekommunikationsgestz (TKG), and the United States passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The TKG was enacted in response to European Community requirements that Germany open its telecommunications market. While the TKG covers a broad spectrum of issues, five areas stand out as the law's primary focus: licensing, universal service, market-dominant position regulation, interconnection, and rights-of-way. A comparison between the U.S and German laws in these five areas demonstrates the …

Editor's Note, Randall W. Sifers

Federal Communications Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Antitrust And Communications: Changes After The Telecommunications Act Of 1996, Douglas B. Mcfadden

Federal Communications Law Journal

The 1996 Telecommunications Act is a return to competition in telephony which existed at the beginning of the century. The enactment of the '96 Act will significantly change the application of the antitrust laws to communications activities. Prior to the enactment of the '96 Act, telecommunications companies were somewhat immunized from full application of the antitrust laws regarding mergers and acquisitions because of regulation by the Federal Communications Commission and the state public utility commissions. Now, telephone companies will be fully subject to antitrust scrutiny under three schemes: the Clayton Act, the Hart-Scott- Rodino Act, and the FCC public interest …

Fcc Reform: Governing Requires A New Standard, William H. Read, Ronald Alan Weiner

Federal Communications Law Journal

Perhaps one of the most crucial questions legislators need to address after passing the 1996 Act is the reform of the Federal Communications Commission. Some suggest that the Commission should be abolished altogether, while others recommend merely curtailing some of the Commission's responsibilities. However, true reform of the FCC recognizes that the Commission still has a vital role to play in the shaping of the telecommunications industry. Instead of dismantling the FCC altogether, Congress should redefine the public interest standard under which the FCC operates. The 1934 Communications Act charged the Federal Communications Commission with protecting "the public interest." While …

Ideas Of The Marketplace: A Guide To The 1996 Telecommunications Act, Michael I. Meyerson

Federal Communications Law Journal

The 1996 Telecommunications Act has forever transformed the regulatory landscape. The Act contemplates the creation of competition across the full telecommunications field, even in areas such as local telephone service and cable television service that had previously been monopoly controlled. The main combatants in this new marketplace will tend to be even larger companies than those currently dominating the scene. There are numerous dangers, however, that will have to be averted in order for the Act to be successful. The first is that existing monopolies, such as the BOCs and cable operators, will leverage their current power either to gain …

Understanding The Telecommunications Act Of 1996, Christopher H. Sterling

Federal Communications Law Journal

Books Reviewed:

Guidebook to the Telecommunications Act of 1996; by Charles D. Ferris, Frank W. Lloyd, and Howard J. Symons; Matthew Bender & Co., Inc. (1996); 298 pages

The Telecommunications Act of 1996: Special Report; by Peter W. Huber, Michael K. Kellogg, and John Thorne; Little, Brown & Co. (1996); 428 pages

Telecommunications Act Handbook: A Complete Reference For Business; by Leon T. Knauer, Ronald K. Machtley, and Thomas M. Lynch; Government Institutes (1996); 620 pages

Legal Guide to Broadcast Law and Regulation; by the National Association of Broadcasters (5th ed. 1996); 700 pages

The Telecommunications Act of 1996: What …

Antitrust: Will It Change The Lives Of Telecommunications Executives?, Deborah V. Ellenberg, Glen O. Robinson, Michael F. Urbanski, James R. Wade

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Good afternoon. This is the last panel of the afternoon. I would like to introduce myself. I'm Deborah Ellenberg, one of the hearing examiners at the State Corporation Commission, and I might add, who has a heightened appreciation for the Virginia Commission's wise decision to handle those arbitrations. I am sure on behalf of Howard, Glenn and myself, we thank you for that decision.

The Communications Decency Act: Aborting The First Amendment?, Sheryl L. Herndon L. Herndon

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

On February 8, 1996, President Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 into law and explained that the legislation would "stimulate investment, promote competition, [and] provide open access for all citizens to the Information Superhighway." However, contrary to the goal of "opening wide the door to the Information Age," provisions of the Act violate the Constitution's First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech by imposing far-reaching new federal criminal liabilities on Americans who exercise their free speech rights on the Internet. In particular, a little-noticed provision of the Act, which expands an 1873 law banning abortion-related speech by criminalizing Internet …

How Have The Procedural Aspects Of The Telecommunications Act Of 1996 Worked?, Clinton Miller, Charles H. Carrathers Iii, Michael Schwarzwalder, Rod Johnson, Jill Butler

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Good morning. I am Clinton Miller. I'm one of the three members of the Virginia State Corporation Commission and charged with moderating this next panel. I will give you a brief overview before they begin because there may be some people in the room who are not deeply familiar with the procedural aspects of the Telecommunication Act of 1996.

Local Franchising: What Role Will Localities Play In The Regulations Of The Telecommunications Industry? Will They Become Providers Of Telecommunications Service To The Public?, Anthony Gambardella, Dana G. Coltrin, Timothy M. Kaine, David W. Ogburn Jr.

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Good morning, everybody. I am Tony Gambardella with the firm of Woods, Rogers & Hazelgrove in Richmond--formerly with the State Corporation Commission. We started yesterday's discussion with the promise of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The main promise was, as of February 8, 1996, Congress had deregulated the telecommunications industry. The problem with the promise is that Congress retained some regulation within the industry. We have regulation at the federal level. We have a huge state role and this morning we are going to add another level--local government. Local governments have a role under the Act. There is some dispute …