FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein suggested today that the FCC should jump into retransmission consent disputes between broadcasters and cable operators if the interest of the viewing public is threatened, and fellow Democrat Michael Copps called for an "overall look" into whether retrans is working as intended.

But the three-member Republican majority indicated that it has no interest in getting involved in retrans policy or negotiations, which are becoming increasingly contentious as broadcasters demand monthly fees from operators for the right to carry their signals.

Under questioning by Nathan Deal (R-Ga.) during a House Telecommunications Subcommittee oversight hearing featuring all five commissioners, Adelstein said the FCC may already have the authority to step into retrans fights for the sake of the public

"The FCC's role is to insure good faith negotiations and there has got to be a way to do that," Adelstein said.

In fact, he said, the legislative history in the 1992 Cable Act that granted broadcasters their retrans rights "did indicate that we would have the authority to enforce and ensure that there is a completion of these negotiations."

The FCC should protect the viewing public by mandating binding arbitration or interim carriage "if no consensus is reached between the parties," Adelstein said.

Copps agreed that the FCC needs to protect the consumer.

"I do think there is a need for an overall look at whether retransmission consent is working as it was originally intended to work and whether it's really protecting small broadcasters, protecting small cable," he said.

Copps added that retransmission consent may be "encouraging consolidation in the industry rather than competition."

None of the Republicans seemed to be interested in becoming retrans mediators.

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin twisted Deal's questions into criticism of cable program pricing and packaging.

"The concern about the way retransmission consent is working with the broadcast providers is a symptom of the larger problem of how content providers are increasingly charging for all the content that is included in the expanded basic cable package…without any kind of transparency as to how much consumers are having to pay," he said.

Broadcasters are asking for "significantly less" than cable networks do to be included in the expanded basic tier, Martin said. "Some additional opportunity for consumers to see how much they are paying for all of their content will be helpful across the board."

Deborah Taylor Tate said simply that retrans is working. "Thousands of these agreements are being done every day."

And Robert McDowell agreed. "The vast, vast majority of retransmission consent negotiations are going well and we don't read about them or hear about them and that's good news," he said. "I hate to put the government thumb on the scale in this regard."

Deal is sympathetic to small cable operators who claim that they are being squeezed by broadcasters in retrans dealings. On behalf of small operators, Deal last year introduced legislation that would reduce broadcasters' negotiating leverage.