PIAC Legacy Project: Statement of Charles Benton on Funding New Education Digital Broadcast Channels, in which Frank M. Blythe, Peggy Charren, Frank H. Cruz, Newton N. Minow, Cass R. Sunstein, Gigi B. Sohn, and James Yee join

Statement of Charles Benton on Funding New Education Digital Broadcast Channels, in which Frank M. Blythe, Peggy Charren, Frank H. Cruz, Newton N. Minow, Cass R. Sunstein, Gigi B. Sohn, and James Yee join

The Administration and Congress should fund additional noncommercial spectrum capacity and noncommercial educational programming through a combination of several of the following options: (1) spectrum auctions; (2) digital broadcast ancillary and supplementary service fees; (3) pay or play fees; (4) a “2 percent solution” of a 2 percent fee on the sale of broadcast and/or telecommunications properties and a 2 percent fee on broadcasters’ gross revenues; and (5) allocation of funds for this purpose through the reauthorization of Federal legislation supporting educational institutions, including the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, in 1999.

The recommendations of the Advisory Committee include a new and imaginative dedication of capacity to expand the flow of information and communication to students within and beyond our traditional school systems. This recommendation will be a hollow promise if Congress does not act to fund this potentially powerful capacity. The acquisition and use of knowledge will be the major resource for our society in the coming century and is pivotal for democracy, our quality of life, our economic development, and indeed our security. Without adequate funding we risk repeating the history of other noncommercial capacity reserves such as the marginalization of cable’s public access, education, and government (PEG) channels, with franchise fees going into the general budgets of municipalities rather than being invested in public interest programming.

The Advisory Committee’s recommendations propose that Congress and the Administration examine three funding sources for the new educational capacity: (1) spectrum auctions, (2) digital broadcast ancillary and supplementary services fees, and (3) “Play or Pay” fees. Items 1 and 2 might have been appropriate and sufficient funding sources but unfortunately have already been scored to balance the Federal budget. Moreover, the Federal Communications Commission’s recent decision to levy a 5 percent gross receipts fee on only the most narrow set of “ancillary or supplementary” services will ensure that this source of funding will be inadequate.(7) Item 3, Play or Pay fees, is a good first step in suggesting alternative funding sources, but is unlikely to generate the predictable funding mechanism needed to support this new capacity.

For these reasons, we suggest new funding mechanisms to support new educational outlets and programming in the age of digital broadcasting. These mechanisms should include a 2 percent fee on the sale of broadcast and/or telecommunications properties and a 2 percent fees on the gross revenues of broadcast, cable, and satellite operators. This “2 percent solution” will provide the predictable funding mechanism needed to support what would then become the Advisory Committee’s greatest legacy: a new local, educational telecommunications infrastructure. The programming provided on this infrastructure could address the educational needs for every American from preschooler to university student, from youngster to lifelong learner.

In an increasingly competitive global economy, it should be noted that other countries are making much better use of television in education than we are. For example, in England there are dedicated public and commercial school television services that now spend more than $50 million per year in producing new programs for school use. We spend a tenth of that for new school productions in a country with four times as many people. Further, the United Kingdom has adult education, training, and lifelong learning broadcast services that annually invest tens of millions more in new programming for public use. Digital television could bring computers and television together to meet educational needs in powerful new ways we can hardly imagine.

Therefore, the Administration and Congress should realize the special opportunity to examine these funding opportunities while reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in 1999. Some $20 billion from the Federal Government are made available annually for education; a portion of these funds should be allocated to educational institutions, libraries, and other community-based groups for access to the public airwaves with new educational programs for “the public interest, convenience and necessity.” To ensure the participation of communities, Congress should require matching local funds to ensure multi-institutional cooperation around shared goals.

The full powers of digital television need to be mobilized for addressing our educational challenges in the next century.

7) See Report and Order, FCC No. 98-303 (released Nov. 19, 1998).