|
LOBBYING REPORT |
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (Section 5) - All Filers Are Required to Complete This Page
2. Address
| Address1 | 317 MASSACHUSETTS AVE., NE, SUITE 300C |
Address2 |
|
| City | WASHINGTON |
State | DC |
Zip Code | 20002 |
Country | USA |
3. Principal place of business (if different than line 2)
| City |
|
State |
|
Zip Code |
|
Country |
|
|
5. Senate ID# 293836-12
|
||||||||
|
6. House ID# 373580000
|
||||||||
| TYPE OF REPORT | 8. Year | 2014 |
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: DERRICK B. OWENS |
Date | 1/20/2015 2:55:27 PM |
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
H.R. 5728, Satellite Reauthorization Act of 2014 and S. 2799, Satellite Television Access and Viewers Rights Act (STAVRA) of 2014 -- WTA lobbied in support of several provisions within these bills that would change the current retransmission consent and pricing arrangements that small rural MVPDs must pay.
On other video-related matters, WTA also supported legislative and regulatory efforts that would: give small MVPDs better access to content; eliminate forced-tying and forced-tiering arrangements; and allow DMAs to be redrawn to allow customers to receive local broadcast channels.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 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 |
Derrick |
Owens |
|
|
|
Patricia |
Cave |
|
|
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 TEC
16. Specific lobbying issues
Universal Service Reform -- WTA continued advocating for a Connect America Fund (CAF) for rural local exchange rate of return carriers (RLECs). More specifically, the association continued to promote the Data Only Broadband (DOBB) proposal that it and several other industry associations have submitted to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for consideration. This proposal would allow customers in RLEC service territories to elect to take a that company's broadband service without having to take its local telephone service and without having to pay a higher rate to do so. WTA's advocacy continued focusing on the need to reform the current universal service fund (USF) contribution methodology, which is based on an ever decreasing number of contributors to the fund. WTA filed USF comments in the House Energy and Commerce Committee's efforts to update the Communications Act. Those comments focused on the need to keep section 254 of the Act which is important if rural areas are to receive reasonably comparable services and rates as those in urban areas. WTA's comments also focused on the Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Services loan programs and their importance to rural telecommunications providers. WTA also filed comments in the FCC's CAF II Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) proceeding. WTA promoted establishing a model for USF support that follows along the lines of the proposal that WTA and its industry partners submitted to the FCC back in 2012-2013 timeframe that's still being revised based on feedback from meetings with FCC staff.
Rural Call Completion -- WTA lobbied in support of S. 2125, the Public Safety and Economic Security Communications Act of 2014. The legislation would require all voice calls to be terminated regardless of where they originate and would require intermediate carriers (e.g., least cost routers) to register with the FCC as being actual businesses. The intent is to make sure these entities are legitimate businesses and that they are capable of routing calls to their final destinations.
E-Rate Modernization -- WTA continued is advocacy in support of modernizing the current E-Rate program because the current bidding process is heavily skewed toward consortiums and in some instances prevents RLECs from being able to participate in the bidding process to provide broadband/Internet access services to schools and libraries at discounted rates. WTA also advocated that the definition designating a "rural" and "urban" area be changed to something more appropriate and that truly reflected a rural area.
Wireless IntraMTA -- This issue involves purported intercarrier compensation disputes associated with the exchange of originating intrastate toll for VoIP traffic on an RLECs network. WTA and others filed a petition with the FCC in July 2014 seeking relief from any reductions in intercarrier compensation associated with such exchange of traffic and our lobbying efforts focused on supporting our petition.
Open Internet/Net Neutrality Proceeding -- WTA met with policymakers to explain its position on this matter. WTA expressed it view that blocking and "throttling" of traffic is not it its members' best interest as local small telecommunications providers. WTA did however, express support for ensure Sections 251, 252 and 254 of the Communications Act remain in place should broadband be reclassified as a Title II service with FCC forbearance from certain portions of Title II.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 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 |
Derrick |
Owens |
|
|
|
Eric |
Keber |
|
|
|
Patricia |
Cave |
|
|
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 HOM
16. Specific lobbying issues
S. 2519, National Cybersecurity Protection Act of 2014 and S. 1353, Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2014 -- WTA lobbied Members of Congress on both of these pieces of legislation to ensure the concerns of small rural local exchange carriers (RLECs/small telecom providers) were taken into consideration should specific mandates be placed up telecommunications carriers to protect their networks.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
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 |
Derrick |
Owens |
|
|
|
Patricia |
Cave |
|
|
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 |
|
3 |
|
||||||
| 2 |
|
4 |
|
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 | 2 | 3 |
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 | 3 | 5 |
| 2 | 4 | 6 |