|
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 | 04/20/2011 |
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.
Retransmission Consent: ACA informed Congress of its continued efforts to encourage the FCC to examine, as part of its (at the time) pending review of the retransmission consent rules, the anti-competitive impact of retransmission consent prices resulting from joint negotiations involving separately owned multiple Big 4 broadcast affiliates in a single market. ACA also stressed the need to review retransmission consent price increases resulting from price discrimination practiced by broadcasters in their dealings with smaller providers. ACA later told lawmakers of its praise for the FCC for agreeing to review its retransmission consent rules, and issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (MB Docket No. 10-71).
Universal Service Reform: ACA notified lawmakers of its support for 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.
Comcast-NBCU Joint Venture: ACA told Members of Congress of its continued advocacy for robust transaction specific conditions on the proposed Comcast-NBCU Joint Venture (MB Docket No. 10-56) to ameliorate the consumer and competitive harms that stem from the pending deal, particularly against smaller cable operators. Later ACA informed lawmakers that it commended the FCC for imposing meaningful conditions that benefited consumers served by smaller communications providers that negotiate with the media giant for access to its most important programming content.
Mobility Fund: ACA explained to Congress that it supported the Federal Communications Commissions Mobility Fund (WT Docket No. 10-208) which would provide limited funding for deployment of advanced wireless broadband networks in rural areas where private investment is unlikely to flow.
NARUC Resolution: ACA told Members of Congress that it commended the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) for adopting a resolution that would urge the FCC to recommend that the Section 706 Joint Conference examine the impact of fair and non-discriminatory access to video content on the deployment of broadband in rural areas by smaller operators.
Petition to Deny Topeka Triopoly: ACA updated lawmakers that it filed a Petition to Deny 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.
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 |