|
LOBBYING REPORT |
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (Section 5) - All Filers Are Required to Complete This Page
2. Address
| Address1 | ONE PARKWAY CENTER, #212 |
Address2 | |
| City | PITTSBURGH |
State | PA |
Zip Code | 15220 |
Country | USA |
3. Principal place of business (if different than line 2)
| City | |
State | |
Zip Code | |
Country | |
|
5. Senate ID# 54528-12
|
||||||||
|
6. House ID# 349900000
|
||||||||
| TYPE OF REPORT | 8. Year | 2011 |
Q1 (1/1 - 3/31) | Q2 (4/1 - 6/30) | Q3 (7/1 - 9/30) | Q4 (10/1 - 12/31) |
9. Check if this filing amends a previously filed version of this report
| 10. Check if this is a Termination Report | Termination Date | |
11. No Lobbying Issue Activity |
| INCOME OR EXPENSES - YOU MUST complete either Line 12 or Line 13 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12. Lobbying | 13. Organizations | ||||||||
| INCOME relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period was: | EXPENSE relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period were: | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
| Provide a good faith estimate, rounded to the nearest $10,000, of all lobbying related income for the client (including all payments to the registrant by any other entity for lobbying activities on behalf of the client). | 14. REPORTING Check box to indicate expense accounting method. See instructions for description of options. | ||||||||
|
Method A.
Reporting amounts using LDA definitions only
Method B. Reporting amounts under section 6033(b)(8) of the Internal Revenue Code Method C. Reporting amounts under section 162(e) of the Internal Revenue Code |
|||||||||
| Signature | Digitally Signed By: Matthew M. Polka, President and CEO |
Date | 07/20/2011 |
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code COM
16. Specific lobbying issues
Please see the addendum attached for the full text of COM issues covered.
COM - Communications/Broadcasting/Radio/TV
SPECTRUM Act (S. 911): ACA told members of Congress that the legislation must compensate cable operators for any adjustments that they have to make to continue retransmitting broadcasters who choose to be relocated to new spectrum or are repacked to make larger, contiguous swaths of vacated spectrum, similar to the compensation that Congress is offering to the broadcasters. ACA praised the version of the bill that passed out of the Senate Commerce Committee on June 8 for addressing the concerns of smaller cable operators.
Broadband Conduit Deployment Act of 2011 (H.R. 1695): ACA told lawmakers of its support for the bill that would require the installation of broadband conduit in road construction projects funded with federal money, in an effort to reduce or eliminate digging on these roads by communications companies that intend to deploy fiber optic cables or similar Internet-access infrastructure, after the roads are built.
Retransmission Consent: ACA informed Congress of its continued efforts to encourage the FCC to examine, as part of its pending review of the retransmission consent rules (MB Docket No. 10-71), the anticompetitive impact of retransmission consent prices resulting from the coordinated negotiations involving separately owned broadcast stations in a single market. ACA also mentioned the need for the Commission to prohibit any TV station or broadcast network (in other words, a third party) from interfering with a cable operators legal right to negotiate for carriage of out-of-market broadcast signals. ACA also stressed the need for the FCC to review retransmission consent price increases resulting from price discrimination practiced by broadcasters in their dealings with smaller providers. Finally, ACA noted that it believes that the Commission must exercise its legal authority to order interim carriage while reviewing a retransmission consent complaint. ACA also told Congress that it expressed these views on price discrimination and coordinated retransmission consent negotiations in its comments in the FCCs annual assessment of the status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming proceeding (MB Docket No. 07-269).
Universal Service Reform: ACA notified lawmakers of its continued support for the FCCs Connect America Fund (WC Docket No. 10-90) initiative to ensure broadband services are available to consumers in unserved and underserved areas. The association told Members of Congress that it believes support for the CAF can be achieved within the current funding for the high-cost USF program; hence, that fund should be capped at current levels. Moreover, ACA explained any CAF awards should be made on a competitively and technologically neutral and precisely targeted basis. Where warranted, funding should be provided separately for wireline and wireless services; in any given area, however, no more than one wireline and wireless provider should receive funding. To fund the CAF initially, USF high-cost funding should be limited or denied to telephone carries that face effective competition within their study areas. But, during the transition to CAF, small voice providers should continue to be able to draw high-cost support.
Petition to Deny Topeka Triopoly: ACA updated lawmakers that it filed a Petition to Deny and a Response with the Federal Communications Commission to condition or block the sale of the ABC affiliate in Topeka, Kansas (File No. BALCDT-20110208ADB), to a company with a track record of creating local market TV station virtual duopolies for the purpose of gaining undue bargaining leverage over cable and satellite TV operators, resulting in higher costs to their customers.
Open Internet: ACA informed Congress of its belief that the Federal Communications Commission had substantially underestimated the burden that the disclosure requirements and complaint process prescribed in its Open Internet and Broadband Industry Practices Report and Order would have on smaller broadband providers, and as such these obligations would not satisfy the Paperwork Reduction Act (OMB Control Number 3060-XXXX).
Video Descriptions: Members of Congress heard from ACA that important adjustments and clarifications to the FCCs proposed video description regulations (MB Docket No. 11-43) are needed to ensure that the rules do no place unnecessary financial burdens on small cable providers in their efforts to comply. ACA explained that the FCC must clarify that the video description rules will apply only to cable systems that serve 50,000 or more subscribers. ACA's clarification would replace proposed language that would have effectively reduced the number of small cable systems eligible for a legal exemption. ACA also sought other modifications that would limit the burden on smaller MVPDs.
Need for Speed Disclosure: ACA informed lawmakers of its position that if the FCC wants to develop a need for speed guide for broadband customers, it should work collaboratively with a diverse range of interested parties, groups and experts to develop a standardized guide modeled after the USDAs former food pyramid. ACA explained that by taking this efficient and cost-effective approach, the Commission can meet its goal of making available useful information to educate consumers about which broadband Internet options on the market will best suit their needs. ACA further told Members of Congress that broadband providers should be required to make the guide available only on their websites. (CG Docket No. 09-158)
Innovation in the Broadcast Television Bands: Congress was notified by ACA of its view that the FCC should refrain from imposing new regulatory burdens on cable operators, such as expanded cable carriage rights for full-power or low-power TV stations, as part of any attempt to reclaim broadcast spectrum for allocation to more innovative uses, such as wireless broadband (ET Docket No. 10-235).
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. SENATE, Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
| First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Ross |
Lieberman |
|
|
|
Matthew |
Polka |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code CPT
16. Specific lobbying issues
Please see the addendum attached for the full text of CPT issues covered.
CPT- Copyright/Patent/Trademark
Copyright Office NOI on Phasing out of the Compulsory License: ACA informed lawmakers of its support for retaining the compulsory license system that allows cable operators to retransmit broadcast TV signals in a cost-efficient manner. To the extent that the Copyright Office suggests to Congress that statutory license is eliminated, ACA called for the Copyright Office to also recommend concurrent reform of the retransmission consent laws and other intertwined broadcast carriage rules. Moreover, ACA said that any replacement system for the compulsory license must prohibit discriminatory licensing fees charged to smaller pay-TV providers, and continue to permit pay-TV providers the right to carry out-of-market broadcast television stations. (Docket No. RM-2010-10)
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. SENATE, Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
| First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Ross |
Lieberman |
|
|
|
Matthew |
Polka |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
Information Update Page - Complete ONLY where registration information has changed.
20. Client new address
| Address | |
||||||
| City | |
State | |
Zip Code | |
Country | |
21. Client new principal place of business (if different than line 20)
| City | |
State | |
Zip Code | |
Country | |
22. New General description of client’s business or activities
LOBBYIST UPDATE
23. Name of each previously reported individual who is no longer expected to act as a lobbyist for the client
|
|
||||||||
| 1 |
|
5 |
|
||||||
| 2 |
|
6 |
|
||||||
| 3 |
|
7 |
|
||||||
| 4 |
|
8 |
|
ISSUE UPDATE
24. General lobbying issue that no longer pertains
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS
25. Add the following affiliated organization(s)
Internet Address:
| Name | Address |
Principal Place of Business (city and state or country) |
||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
26. Name of each previously reported organization that is no longer affiliated with the registrant or client
| 1 | 3 | 5 |
| 2 | 4 | 6 |
FOREIGN ENTITIES
27. Add the following foreign entities:
| Name | Address |
Principal place of business (city and state or country) |
Amount of contribution for lobbying activities | Ownership percentage in client | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
% | |||||||||||||
28. Name of each previously reported foreign entity that no longer owns, or controls, or is affiliated with the registrant, client or affiliated organization
| 1 | 5 | 9 |
| 2 | 6 | 10 |
| 3 | 7 | 11 |
| 4 | 8 | 12 |