Larry Pressler

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to cosponsor the Snowe-Campbell amendment.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, my amendment concerns the issue of metric conversion. It makes clear that in this era of significant budgetary pressures, expenditures on metric conversion does not deserve priority. We must preserve Federal and State transportation funds for more important needs. Let me explain. The Federal Highway Administration, by regulation, is requiring metric conversion of internal processes for all States by September 30, 1996. If a State is not in compliance, Federal-aid highway funds will be lost. What would such internal conversion entail? In addition to engineering and planning concerns, this would require States to rewrite their highway and transportation design procedures as well as to rewrite their motor vehicle and drivers license manuals. Their procedures for the purchase of materials and equipment would need to be altered and they would need to provide retraining to workers. All this and more by September 30, 1996. Would a better approach not be to give States adequate time to allocate resources and provide for internal metric conversion based on their own unique funding priorities? It would. Mr. President, infrastructure needs and costs continue to increase dramatically. While I am not at all opposed to metric conversion, I believe it could best be accomplished at the discretion of each State. After all, should not each State be allowed to consider their unique funding needs? They should. And that is what my amendment would allow. Specifically, my amendment would allow the Secretary of Transportation to waive, upon the receipt of a written notification by a State, any requirement that such State use or plan to use the metric system with respect to designing, preparing plans, specifications and estimates, advertising, or taking any other action with respect to Federal-aid highway projects or activities. The waiver would be in effect until September 30, 2000. Mr. President, my amendment has no budget impact. However, it would help States with limited resources to deliver more services to their citizens. Should that not be our primary objective? I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill to make technical improvements in the Impact Aid Program. Last year, I was pleased to be the lead sponsor of the initial Impact Aid reauthorization. That bill was incorporated into the Improving America's Schools Act, now Public Law 103-382. As my colleagues know, the Impact Aid Program is an ongoing Federal responsibility. More than 2,600 school districts enrolling more than 20 million children depend on the program. In South Dakota for example, Impact Aid is the lifeblood of more than 55 school districts. Without it, these districts could not recoup the lost tax base caused by a Federal presence. As with any legislation of this scope, corrections often need to be made. The bill I am introducing today fine-tunes last year's reauthorization in several ways. The bill first makes technical changes in section 8002, which reimburses districts for Federal land. During the reauthorization, language was omitted which permitted districts which had been formerly consolidated to retain their eligibility. It was not the intent of the authorizing committees to exclude these districts. The provision in my bill would restore eligibility to more than 80 school districts, allowing them to receive the revenue they had planned on. Second, a hold harmless agreement for section 8002 school districts also would be put in place. The reauthorization made dramatic changes in the formula for section 8002. The hold harmless provision would prevent a district's payment from being decreased below 85 percent of its payment for the previous year. This agreement would protect section 8002 school districts and expedite payments while the Department of Education works out the new calculations. This brings section 8002 into line with the other sections of the law, which also contain hold harmless provisions. Third, the bill would make several clarifications in section 8003, the section which authorizes funding for heavily impacted districts. One of these provisions clarifies the legal use of supplemental funds received by section 8003 districts from the Department of Defense. These school districts should not have these supplemental payments counted against their regular section 8003 payments. The Department of Defense payments were intended as additional payments for capital outlay expenses, not as funds for day-to-day operations. Fourth, the bill amends the law regarding ``civilian b'' students. ``B'' students are those whose parents either live or work on Federal property. In [[Page S 8708]] the past, school districts could be eligible for ``b'' funds if either 15 percent or 2,000 students in impacted average daily attendance [ADA] are ``b'' students. The reauthorization changed this language so that only school districts with 15 percent impacted ADA and 2,000 impacted students may qualify. This change excluded many previously eligible schools from the program, especially in small States such as South Dakota. This change tilts the program in favor of large urban areas at the expense of small rural areas. Many, if not most, school districts in South Dakota do not have 2,000 students in ADA, much less 2,000 impacted students. Finally, the bill would allow two districts in South Dakota, Bonesteel-Fairfax and Wagner, to claim eligibility for section 8003 for the current year. These two schools meet all the criteria for section 8003 funds, but could not qualify because of regulations that prevented them from amending their application after September 30. Allowing these two districts to claim eligibility would not alter section 8003 payments to other schools. This bill represents no departures in policy from previous legislation. It would require no new funds. It simply would clear up several areas of uncertainty and enable the program to run more efficiently. This bill enjoys bipartisan support. The Impact Aid Program has been operating successfully for more than 40 years. These changes will help the program continue to run smoothly for years to come. Mr. President, as we begin this year's appropriations process, the Impact Aid Program is in danger once again of being drastically cut. Again, I remind my colleagues that it is due to a Federal presence that nearby schools lose tax revenue and have to rely on the Impact Aid Program. It would be most unfair to federally impacted districts and the children they serve if the Federal government opted to deny them both a tax base and Federal support. Without this Federal support, local and county governments would be forced to either raise taxes or cut services to its citizens. A Federal presence should not force local governments to make that choice. Impact Aid is a continuing responsibility that Congress cannot shirk. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to further enhance this program in the year ahead. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, when I was growing up, professional baseball flourished in South Dakota. I remember many games from the now-defunct Basin League. Those teams stimulated and nurtured my love of America's greatest pastime. Therefore, as a lifelong baseball fan, I am very pleased to announce that professional baseball has returned to Aberdeen, SD, after a 24-year hiatus. Last Friday night, June 16, the Aberdeen Pheasants won their home opener at Fossum Field against Saskatchewan's Regina Cyclones, 7-3. Since opening their 71 game season on the road on June 9 against Manitoba's Brandon Greyowls, the Pheasants have played brilliantly, winning eight of their first nine games. They are tied for the lead in their division. I am confident the team's early success is an indication of great seasons and thrilling action in the months and years ahead. The 1995 Aberdeen Pheasants are part of the newly formed Prairie League, an eight-team independent professional baseball league consisting of four American and four Canadian teams. The Pheasants' ownership committee has a distinct local flavor consisting of 20 Aberdeen residents. The committee's executive leadership consists of Jeff Sveen, Dr. Scott Barry, and Keith Kusler will work closely with Arthur Bright, the vice president of operations and Rich Bosma, the team's general manager. I congratulate them and the entire ownership committee for bringing baseball back to Aberdeen, and for their team's early success this year. Mr. President, I also am proud, though not surprised, how the entire Aberdeen community has rallied behind the effort to return pro baseball to the area. The Pheasants are the talk of the town. Friday's home opener was very well attended. Knowing the enthusiasm for baseball in the area, I am sure fan support will remain strong throughout the season. The 1995 Pheasants are the latest chapter in the long and proud history of Aberdeen professional baseball. The city had a class D baseball team in the 1920 South Dakota League and from 1921 to 1923 in the reorganized Dakota League. In 1946, the Aberdeen Pheasants joined the old Northern League as a farm team for the Baltimore Orioles and remained in the Northern League until the entire league collapsed after the 1971 season. During this 25-year period, as many as 40 Pheasant players went on to play in the Major Leagues. Among the notable Pheasant alumni were Hall of Fame pitcher Jim Palmer; Don Larson, who pitched a perfect game in the 1956 World Series; 1958 Cy Young winner Bob Turley and New York Yankee all-star player Lou Piniella. In addition, Cal Ripken, Sr., managed the Pheasants prior to assuming the same duties for the Baltimore Orioles. I am confident present Pheasants manager Bob Flori, assistant Coach Joe Calfapietra, and their crew of young, talented players will carry on the great traditions established by these players. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to place in the Record the team roster of the 1995 Aberdeen Pheasants at the conclusion of my remarks. Mr. President, on behalf of the people of South Dakota, I want to welcome back the Pheasants to Aberdeen and wish them the best of luck in their inaugural season. Gentlemen, play ball!

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Yes; I agree. It is my intention to address these problems in conference.

Mr. PRESSLER

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I thank everybody involved. I thank the majority leader and minority leader. I have already thanked the staff. I am feeling like this Chamber was almost a funeral parlor this afternoon, we had so many good words said about everybody. I yield the floor.

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have Senator Hollings added as a cosponsor.

Mr. PRESSLER. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that S. 652, as amended, be printed in the Record immediately following the final vote.

Mr. PRESSLER. I thank the Senator from Louisiana. He has been at the forefront every step of the way in this bill and we could not have done it without his bipartisan effort. His staffers, Thomas Moore, who has now gone on to an appointment, and Mark Ashby, have been in the night meetings, night after night. I thank the Senator from Louisiana from the bottom of my heart.

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, competition and deregulation will bring great benefits to South Dakota and other States with small cities. For example, the bill is designed to rapidly accelerate private sector development of advanced telecommunications and information technologies and services to all Americans by opening all telecommunications markets to competition. A recent series of television commercials have shown people sending faxes from the beach, having meetings via computer with people in a foreign country, using their computer to search for theater tickets and a host of other services that soon will be available. My bill would make those services available even sooner by removing restrictive regulations. A person living in Brandon could work at a job in Minneapolis or Chicago, students in Lemmon would be able to take classes from teachers in Omaha, and doctors in Freeman could consult with specialists at the Mayo Clinic. Telecommunications can bring new economic growth, education, health care and other opportunities to South Dakota. Competition in the information and communications industries means more choices for people in South Dakota. It will also mean lower costs and a greater array of services and technologies. For instance, competing for customers will compel companies to offer more advanced services like caller ID or local connections to on-line services such as Prodigy and America On-Line. It hasn't been that long since Ma Bell was everyone's source for local phone service, long distance service and phone equipment. Now there are over 400 long distance companies and people can buy phone equipment at any department or discount store. Under my bill, eventually people would be able to choose from more than one local phone service or cable television operator. This new competition also should lead to economic development opportunities in South Dakota. People will be able to locate businesses in towns like Groton and Humboldt and serve customers in Hong Kong or New York City. We are entering an exciting, historic era. I want to spur growth and bring new opportunities to South Dakota and everywhere in America. Mr. President, we are reaching the close of this debate and a vote on final passage of S. 652. I am confident we are about to approve telecommunications reform by a wide margin. This reform is not a partisan issue. This is the first major bipartisan legislation of the 104th Congress. I want to thank my comanager, the Senator from South Carolina, for his leadership. Today's vote will bring to fruition a project he has been working on for many, many years. I want to thank the majority leader and the minority leader for their indispensable efforts for passage of this bill. The bill we are about to pass will break up monopolies. It will tear down competitive barriers. It will open up communications networks. Mr. President, every American household and every business large and small, uses the services we are about to make more competitive. The bill we are about to pass will give the American people unprecedented freedom to choose. After this bill is signed and implemented, Americans will be free to choose from competing local phone companies. This is unprecedented. It will lower prices. It is pro-consumer. S. 652 will give Americans freedom to choose among more long-distance companies. This will cut prices. This is pro-consumer. This bill will usher in a new era of robust competition in cable TV. It will, in effect, break up all the cable TV monopolies. This will give consumers more freedom to choose. It will cut prices. It will expand services. This, too, is pro-consumer. S. 652 will let electric utility firms get into the phone or cable business if they wish. It will give broadcasters new flexibility to use new digital technology to offer multichannel programming with the same allocated spectrum that formerly could carry only one channel. This, Mr. President, dramatically gives consumers more freedom to choose., No earlier legislation concerning cable prices--neither the deregulation of 1984 nor the reregulation of 1992--included these powerful procompetitive reforms. This reform bill is historic. It is strongly bipartisan. It deserves the President's support. Some who still oppose our reform bill are trying to get the President's ear. They say this bill will lead to more concentration in the communications business. I say that is a myth. Concentration is what we have had under the old, 1930s-era system of government-created monopolies. Breaking up the monopolies and lifting burdensome regulation will give room for more entrepreneurs to compete. Just consider other segments of the information industry, segments which did not strain under regulation and the monopoly model: Fax machines aren't regulated or organized into a government- sanctioned monopoly. Just look at how prices have dropped, quality has improved, and sales have soared. So it is, too, with cellular phones and pagers. The computer market now gives consumers 200 times more value, in terms of lower price and greater power, than it offered just a decade ago. Freedom for consumers and entrepreneurs did not lead to concentration in the computer business. No, quite the contrary. There have been winners and losers, large and small. Hundreds of start-up firms have flourished, including Gateway 2000 in my State of South Dakota. Meanwhile the biggest computer firm of all has seen a huge loss in market share and has been forced into significant restructuring. Free market capitalism breeds a kind of creative destruction of big businesses. This is good for continuing innovation and renewal in business. It is clearly pro-consumer. [[Page S8477]] Mark my word, in the years after this bill comes into force, it will have helped bring about the rise of exciting new firms which do not exist today. It will have helped usher in industry segments which have no lobbyists in the reception room today--industry segments which do not even exist at this time. This bill will accelerate the digital revolution. Through digitization, the very same data can travel through space from satellites, over the atmospheric spectrum, through coaxial cable, fiber-optic threads or copper wire. The same digitized data can be stored on computer disks or drives, displayed on computer screens, or played on audio or video disk players. The trends of technology are erasing old distinctions between cable TV, telephone service, broadcasting, audio and video recording, and interactive personal computers. But in many instances, the only thing standing in the way of consumers and businesses enjoying cheaper and more flexible telecommuncations services is our outdated law. This reform bill will allow the cable, telephone, computer, broadcasting, and other telecommunications industries more easily to converge and transform themselves. The information industry already constitutes one-seventh of the U.S. economy. Worldwide, the information marketplace is projected to exceed $3 trillion by the close of the decade. Digital convergence, more communicating power, and wide-open competition is what consumers want. It is what American businesses need to stay competitive with the rest of the world. It will come soon if the President signs this reform legislation.

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I have received a letter from Laska Schoenfelder, public utilities commissioner of the State of South Dakota. Commissioner Schoenfelder has many years experience working to support South Dakota consumers and to help provide them better telecommunications services. She enthusiastically endorses S. 652. Commissioner Schoenfelder writes, ``This bill will allow Americans greater access to communication services at an affordable price which can only be achieved through a competitive market. The bill also preserves universal service, which is vital to rural states.'' I ask unanimous consent that the letter be printed in the Record.

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, citizens in my State of South Dakota often ask me, what does this legislation mean to the State of South Dakota? What does it mean to people living in small cities? I say a great deal. First it will mean that a small city will be able to be on the same basis as a big city in terms of getting information. We have CitiBank's credit card operation located in Sioux Falls. We have the Spiegel Catalog telephone mail order facility in Rapid City. Recently, a team from Georgetown University came to Sioux Falls to start a joint research project on telemedicine. Georgetown is planning to work with a Sioux Falls hospital to establish this telemedicine project. Recently, I was talking to some of the major universities in this country about partnering with small South Dakota colleges. Modern telecommunications will make such partnerships not only possible, but productive. I have recently approached one of the largest companies in the United States about doing a project jointly with small companies, using modern telecommunications. The city of Aberdeen, SD, has a new upgrade digital switch. They are now able to use this capability for telemedicine, to have an interaction with some of the big hospitals as operations are being performed. As a result of the upgrade, a major motel chain, Super 8, was able to locate its nationwide reservation system in the city. Someone living in a small city or a small town has the same information available as someone in a great city. You do not have to be in downtown New York, downtown Minneapolis, or in downtown Los Angeles to get information, use it and respond to it. The executive director of the Northeast Council of Governments in my State has sent me a well-prepared report on what new telecommunications will mean in that region of smaller cities in rural areas. She reports that upgrading telecommunications technology has already attracted national companies to Aberdeen, where they have created hundreds of new jobs in the last year. Other communities are clamoring for upgrades to their communications technology. They know this will help improve the quality of life in their communities. Faye Kann's report also describes the potential for telemedicine and long-distance learning with an improved telecommunications infrastructure in northeast South Dakota. I ask unanimous consent to have this report printed in the Record. Telecommunication Technology in Northeast South Dakota (By Faye Kann) Competition in the telecommunications arena could benefit rural areas such as northeast South Dakota. The SD Public Utilities Commission worked very hard to help Aberdeen and the region upgrade the telecommunications capabilities in order to effectively compete for business retention and creation. With the availability of competition, the upgrade of technology equipment could have occurred earlier. In 1994-5, approximately 400 jobs have been newly created or retained in Aberdeen due to the upgrade of telecommunications technology and the ability for rapid data transmission. Four separate national and local entities saw the opportunity to utilize upgraded telecommunications equipment but needed the assistance of the state PUC in order to obtain the equipment upgrades. Companies such as Super 8 reservation systems, Howard Johnson's Reservation system, Aman Collection Company, and Student Loan Finance Corporation are among companies that added employees due to the technology upgrades. Without the telecommunications upgrade, one of these companies would have located in another state instead of South Dakota. Those upgrades include the installation of SwitchNet 56, ISDN lines, and Signal 7 technology. That more up-to-date technology has enabled those companies to locate and maintain their companies in Aberdeen and keep jobs in northeast South Dakota. The increased payrolls and job opportunities have added to the number of jobs available to a broad spectrum of age groups employed in telecommunication agencies. The general nature of telecommunications jobs allow for flexible work schedules to accommodate workers from all age groups to interact both professionally and to maintain their excellent quality of life in South Dakota. Other communities in northeast South Dakota such as Britton, Eureka, and Gettysburg are actively seeking job growth due to upgrades in telecommunications equipment throughout the region. Manufacturers in Britton such as Horton Industries and Sheldahl, Inc. with approximately 400 employees are currently using telecommunications equipment to communicate with their suppliers, markets, potential contracts and corporate headquarters. Use of the telecommunications equipment allows for quick, effective two- way interaction in the design stage before production. Another component of the telecommunications industry focuses on long distance learning. The statewide Rural Development Telecommunications Network (RDTN) allows higher education to offer classes for students across the state. Schools in communities such as Groton, Frederick, and Webster in northeast South Dakota utilize cost efficiencies and class offerings that are available with telecommunications through the North Central Area Interconnect (NCAI) system. Continuing education for communities and school district staff allow for future development and curriculum enhancement. Northern State University is moving ahead with expanding the connections on campus. The campus infrastructure would allow all video/audio conferences, meetings and instructional programs to be shown in the individual classrooms. Many classrooms, one existing microcomputer lab, and a new multi- media based Instructional Classroom will be connected to the LAN network. This classroom will be equipped with appropriate printers, scanners, and display equipment as well as a fully interactive video-conferencing component. In addition, telemedicine is being used in the experimental stage in the region. The impact of the next phase of the regional telecommunications upgrade will place the high resolution telecommunications equipment in outlying clinic for patient diagnosis and effective utilization of physician's assistants and nurse practitioners. Those types of clinics are in communities where doctors are unwilling or unable to locate. The aging population as shown in the demographics of South Dakota rate health care as one of the top concerns. Another community which is a good example of the need for state-of-the-art technology for a point of presence and fiber optics is Huron. Several major employers have considered Huron for economic development expansion but because of the lack of access and equipment, jobs and economic opportunity were denied in the northeast region of South Dakota. When checking with telecommunications companies who provide the necessary equipment, the cost to benefit ratio is not attractive in the rural areas and therefore equipment has not been installed and access is denied. Education, government, and business are supporting the creation of CityNet in Aberdeen. The local cable company is upgrading its system with the installation of a large fiber- optic cable network. In addition to the cable company's normal services, this fiber- [[Page S8476]] optic infrastructure will be used to connect various entities (K-12 education, higher education, all levels of governments, health care, and individual homes and businesses). The uses for the network are virtually limitless and offer a means for connections not only within the community but to the world as this network connects with other networks. Competition coupled with universal service is a must for rural states to have access for all citizens. If major telecommunications networks such as Internet access are denied in the rural areas, state-of-the-art technology will be deployed only in the mass markets with dense population where the providers are able to obtain cost-benefit ratios which are attractive to the provider. It is imperative that Congress understand this issue. Aberdeen hosts an annual telecommunications conference and was the first demonstration nationwide with an interactive two-way audio/video link over the public switched network with the US Senate Recording Studio in 1994. We invite interested parties to northeast South Dakota to view our projects and partake in demonstrations of the effect of utilization of the technology.

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the remaining Breaux amendment be modified with the modification I send to the desk, that the modified amendment be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that it be in order for me to send to the desk two technical amendments and a modification of amendment No. 1313, that they be considered and agreed to, en bloc, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I shall stop speaking the minute either the Majority Leader or Minority Leader walk in the door. I wanted to take this time to make my concluding remarks. I think this bill will result in lower telephone rates, lower cable rates, and more services to the American people. I think this is a very exciting era, and this bill an historic opportunity. I hope the House acts quickly, and I hope we have a conference as soon as is practicable. I hope a Conference Report can be adopted by both the House and the Senate, and I hope the President will sign the bill. The intention of this bill is to get everybody else into everybody else's business. It is to promote competition and to deregulate. It has been a struggle because almost everybody in the industry says they are for deregulation. Yes, they say they are for deregulation, but they usually mean deregulation of the other guy. This is a balanced, bipartisan bill. I think it is truly the first major bipartisan bill we have moved through the Senate this year. We have had our differences, but I believe that this bill will cause an explosion of new jobs. I believe that it will cause a new era, similar to what has occurred in the computer industry. Amendment No. 1299, As Modified Amendment No. 1422 Amendment No. 1423 Amendment No. 1313

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, In raising the ownership cap to 35 percent of the Nation's TV households immediately, with a biennial regulatory reform review, it is our intent to permit broadcast companies to achieve greater operational efficiencies through expanded group ownership of television stations. There is a danger, however, that future changes to the FCC's attribution rules--for example, prospectively or retroactively restricting the availability of the single majority shareholder exemption or attributing nonvoting stock-- could cause some ownership interests not now covered by the cap to fall within the scope of this regulation. Such a result could seriously undermine the goal that we are seeking to advance through adoption of this legislation. Accordingly, the committee expects the FCC to avoid the adoption of more onerous or restrictive attribution policies that would reduce the national station ownership potential of individual companies below the level that would be permitted under a 35-percent cap utilizing the attribution rules that are currently in effect. promoting the use of telecommuting

Mr. PRESSLER. I concur with the Senator and thank him for his comments.

Mr. PRESSLER. I thank the Senator. Now, I will yield to the Senior Senator from Oregon, who I understand would also like to comment on this important subject.

Mr. PRESSLER. For purposes of public safety radio services, there are many circumstances when the transportation industry must rely on radio telecommunications to address safety concerns. For example, the railroad industry uses radio spectrum for voice and data communications that are essential to public safety. Freight and passenger railroads rely upon radio communications to transmit authority for train movements, to broadcast emergency warnings, and to seek emergency response in the event of accidents. Indeed, radio communications can often be critical to addressing the safety concerns of many modes of transportation. Does the Senator from Alaska agree with my views?

Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I understand there is some concern among those in the transportation industry over an amendment agreed to earlier regarding the use of auctions for the allocation of radio spectrum frequencies. Specifically, the amendment would extend the FCC's authority to use auctions for the allocation of radio spectrum frequencies for commercial use. That amendment, which I supported, also includes a provision to exclude so-called ``public safety radio services'' from competitive bidding requirements. I see the sponsor of the amendment on the floor. Will the Senior Senator from Alaska enter a very short colloquy to help me put to rest the concerns over this amendment?

Mr. PRESSLER. The understanding of my colleague from North Carolina is correct.

Mr. PRESSLER. The competitive checklist is found in section 255(b)(2) and is intended to be a current reflection of those things that a telecommunications carrier would need from a Bell operating company in order to provide a service such as telephone exchange service or exchange access service in competition with the Bell operating company. This competitive checklist could best be described as a snapshot of what is required for these competitive services now and in the reasonably foreseeable future. In other words, these provisions open up the local loop from a technological standpoint as section 254 opens the local loop from a legal barrier to entry standpoint. Section 251's ``minimum standards'' permit regulatory flexibility and are not limited to a ``snapshot'' of today's technology or requirements. nondiscriminatory treatment

Mr. PRESSLER. No.