That was the argument. That was the argument. There were some who questioned that, of course, assuming that here, as in most instances, the real goal was to eliminate competition and permit the increase in prices. But that cynical assertion was denied by the bill's proponents. Now, of course, we are, in fact, seeing rate increases.
Consumers can get protection with regard to prices in two ways.
One is to have a genuinely competitive marketplace, where you would have three, half a dozen or a dozen cable television suppliers in the community, as you have a half a dozen grocery stores available in the community. And then the marketplace at least has some capacity to hold prices down because if they get too high, we shift to another supplier. The other way in which consumers can get protection involves monopolies like railroads or the old telephone company. There is absolutely nothing holding down cable prices. There are some ineffective FCC standards, but they really provide very little restraint indeed.