|
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 | 10/20/2011 |
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) / Spectrum Innovation Act of 2011 (House Discussion Draft): 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.
Retransmission Consent: ACA informed Congress of its continued efforts to encourage the Federal Communications Commission (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 FCC 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 FCC must exercise its legal authority to order interim carriage while reviewing a retransmission consent complaint. ACA also told lawmakers of its letter to the FCC in which the trade organization asserted that Nexstar Broadcasting Groups antitrust suit against Granite Broadcasting Group rests on the same basic economic argument as ACAs concerns about coordinated retransmission consent negotiations by separately owned stations in the same market. Additionally, Members of Congress heard from ACA about LIN TVs staging a signal blackout to pressure cable company Mediacom Communications to pay excessive amounts of cash for retransmission consent.
Universal Service Reform: ACA notified members of Congress of its view that the FCC should reject Americas Broadband Connectivity (ABC) Plan that was presented to the Commission for public review in the FCCs Connect America Fund (CAF) proceeding (WC Docket No. 10-90) by AT&T, Verizon and a group of medium-sized telephone companies. ACA told lawmakers that the ABC was neither competitively neutral nor fiscally sound, and that the FCC should support reforms along lines suggested by ACA and other organizations, such as using competitive bidding to distribute CAF funding and imposing a hard and durable cap on the High Cost fund. ACA noted that smaller, incumbent (rate-of-return) LECs should be given a longer transition period from current High-Cost support. Upon first hearing of the ACA plan a month earlier, ACA informed Congress that it would reserve judgment until the plans details were made available for inspection.
CALM Act Implementation: With respect to the FCCs rulemaking on implementing the CALM Act (MB Docket No. 11-93), ACA notified lawmakers that the group told the FCC in comments and reply comments to keep in mind that Congress crafted a limited role for cable operators, and urged the agency to adopt new rules in a manner that would minimize the burdens on small and medium-sized cable operators. ACA noted that the law does not impose a broad mandate regarding commercials embedded in upstream cable and broadcast programming that is merely passed through to subscribers by cable operators.
Open Internet: ACA informed Congress that it commended the FCC for issuing a Public Notice offering initial guidance regarding specific methods of disclosure that will be considered to comply with the transparency rule adopted in the FCCs Preserving the Open Internet, Broadband Industry Practices, Report and Order, 25 FCC Rcd 17905, 17936-41 (2010).
Cable-CLEC Mergers: ACA told elected offices that it filed comments with the FCC in response to the FCCs Public Notice seeking comment on NCTAs petitions regarding Sec. 652 of the Communications Act (Docket No. WC 11-118). ACA urged the FCC to eliminate regulatory impediments to cable operators and competitive local exchange carriers (CLECs) merging. ACA argued that these combinations serve the public interest because they foster greater facilities-based competition with established incumbent phone companies long dominant in their regions.
Broadband and VoIP Outage Reporting: ACA told Congress of its view that the FCC should minimize regulatory burdens on small cable companies in the event the agency imposes network outage reporting requirements on VoIP and broadband Internet access providers as part of its proposed rulemaking (PS Docket No., 11-82, FCC 11-74), a step that would require companies to devote scarce capital to the acquisition of expensive network monitoring equipment, software, and personnel.
Regional Sports Networks: Lawmakers heard from the ACA on its view that the FCC should examine how Regional Sports Networks (RSNs) affiliated with large distributors charge their rivals higher fees and how small cable operators have no effective redress under the agencys existing program access framework, resulting in harm to consumers and competition. ACA noted that the group stated its position in the FCC Media Bureaus Public Notice on the Regional Sports Network Marketplace (MB No. 11-128).
Video Descriptions: Members of Congress heard from ACA that the FCC adopted video description regulations (MB Docket No. 11-43) in a manner respectful of concerns expressed by independent cable operators.
Emergency Alert System: ACA informed members of Congress that it applauded the FCC for extending until June 30, 2012 the deadline for cable operators to come into compliance with the Emergency Alert Systems (EAS) Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) in its Fourth Report and Order, EB Docket No. 04-296.
Google Acquisition of Motorola Mobility: ACA alerted Congress that the group will be carefully reviewing Googles plans to purchase Motolora Mobility, a major supplier of set-top boxes to the cable industry to determine if the deal would present harm to consumers or competition.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. SENATE,
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 Phase out of the Compulsory License: ACA encouraged Congress to retain the copyright compulsory license system that allows cable operators to retransmit broadcast TV signals in a fair and cost-efficient manner. ACAs views came in response to a new report by the U.S. Copyright Office that three statutory licenses governing the retransmission of traditional broadcast television signals by cable and satellite TV service providers should be phased out and replaced by market-based licensing mechanisms. Specifically, ACA highlighted how the Section 111 copyright license has cleared copyright for cable carriage of out-of-market TV signals, and that many cable systems in rural areas, especially those on the outskirts of Designated Market Areas (DMAs), offered these distant signals that are valued by consumers because local TV signals were unavailable or limited.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. SENATE,
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 |