H.R. 3719: Video CHOICE Act of 2013
Before you vote › Federal bills
H.R. 3719: Video CHOICE Act of 2013
113th Congress · introduced 2013-12-12 · Science, Technology, Communications · Latest: Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology.
federal
Follow this bill, step by step
- Where it came from: introduced 2013-12-12 · official record
- Who proposed it: Rep. Eshoo, Anna G. [D-CA-18] · what a sponsor is
- What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
- Where it stands now: Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
- If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.
Official title
Video CHOICE Act of 2013
Plain summary
Video Consumers Have Options in Choosing Entertainment Act of 2013 or the Video CHOICE Act of 2013 - Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to allow the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), if a negotiation for a replacement or extended retransmission consent agreement between a television broadcast station and a multichannel video programming distributor (MVPD) reaches an impasse resulting in the expiration of the carriage rights of the MVPD, to authorize interim carriage of such station by the MVPD pending the conclusion of a new agreement. Prohibits a station that elects to grant retransmission consent from entering into an agreement with an MVPD that is conditioned on carriage of any other programming affiliated with such station (or with a person who owns or controls, is owned or controlled by, or is under common ownership or control with such station). Directs the FCC to complete a rulemaking proceeding to determine whether, during retransmission consent negotiations or after the parties to such negotiations reach an impasse resulting in the expiration of an existing agreement, the blocking of online content owned by or affiliated with a television broadcast station constitutes a failure to negotiate in good faith under communications laws addressing false, fraudulent, or unauthorized transmissions. Removes from the minimum contents of a basic service tier a requirement for cable system operators to provide to subscribers any signal of any television broadcast station that is provided by the cable operator to any subscriber, thereby enabling subscribers to obtain basic cable television service without receiving broadcast stations that elect to collect fees through retransmission consent agreements. Requires each cable system operator to offer its subscribers a separately available retransmission consent service tier that consists only of the signal of each television broadcast station electing retransmission consent that is carried on the cable system. Makes such retransmission consent service tier subject to the same rate regulation as the basic service tier. Prohibits cable operators from requiring a subscription to any tier of service other than the required basic service tier as a condition of access to, or from discriminating between subscribers to the basic service tier and other subscribers with regard to the rates charged for: (1) video programming offered on a per channel or per program basis, or (2) the retransmission consent service established under this Act. (Thus, prohibits services or programming from being limited to certain "bundling" arrangements.) Directs the FCC to submit to Congress an annual report regarding the costs paid by MVPDs for carriage of regional and national television sports networks in the top 20 regional sports markets.
Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.
What a vote does
A “Yea” vote
If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.
A “Nay” vote
If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.
PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).
What does this mean? (plain words)
Official text
Video CHOICE Act of 2013
Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text
No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.
Limited to a few requests an hour per person.
The strongest published arguments
Arguments for (supporters)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Arguments against (opponents)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Alternatives
Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes
Officials and money
Sponsor: Rep. Eshoo, Anna G. [D-CA-18] · 1 cosponsors
Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.
Cosponsors on this site
Zoe Lofgren (D-CA)
No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.
Words on this page, explained (2)
- Authorization
- A law that creates or continues a government program and says what it may do, often with a suggested spending ceiling. An authorization alone does not provide money; a separate appropriation does.
- Rulemaking
- The process agencies use to write regulations that carry out laws passed by Congress or a legislature. Usually an agency publishes a proposed rule, takes public comments, then publishes a final rule.
Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
- Congress.gov
- Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-113hr3719.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/113/hr>
Record fed-us-cong113-hr3719 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong113 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong113