Save Access

from: Chicago Sun Times

Consumer protections are cable bill victory

June 7, 2007

You can already get phone service from your cable company. And if a promising bill in Springfield becomes law, you could soon get TV service from your phone company. The result should be a win for customers, not only because the bill will spur competition for TV service as well as phone service, but also because the measure contains some consumer protections that are the strongest in the country.

Crafting a bill that unanimously cleared the House last week was a major accomplishment. The original measure, written by phone giant AT&T, was strongly opposed by Comcast and other cable operators, as well as the Illinois Municipal League, whose member cities and towns feared the loss of control and of thousands of dollars in franchise fees. That's because the proposal eliminates the need for any company wanting to offer TV service to negotiate town-by-town franchise agreements -- something Comcast had to do -- in favor of winning authorization from the Illinois Commerce Commission to provide service anywhere in the state.

RELATED STORIES
• Stem cell research bill should be enacted into law
But sponsoring Rep. Jim Brosnahan (D-Evergreen Park), working with the office of Attorney General Lisa Madigan, rewrote the legislation to address most if not all of the complaints and make it fair to both cable and phone companies. Under the rewritten bill, which is now before the Senate, companies that win authorization from the ICC would still have to answer to local governments and/or Madigan's office for fraud or deception complaints from customers. They would have to get local clearance for building their infrastructure in the public rights of way. They would still have to pay towns a fee similar to the franchise fees those towns now receive. Public access channels will be preserved. And the companies must meet timetables for expanding their service, and do it in such a way that low-income neighborhoods are not bypassed.

In addition, to address a chronic complaint about missed and tardy service calls, the companies must offer a four-hour appointment window -- and if they miss it, they must give customers a $25 credit. Another complaint, that customers are often locked into lengthy contracts, is addressed by limiting contracts to one year. In the event the process does not work out as intended, the bill has a six-year sunset so improvements can be made.

Those changes were enough to get opponents to drop their opposition, if not win them over completely. That's why the House passed the bill without a negative vote. The Senate should follow suit, and the governor should quickly sign the legislation. Brosnahan, Madigan and all those involved deserve praise for negotiating a bill that holds such great promise for Illinois consumers, opening the door to better service and cheaper rates.