This is one in a series of hearings on the Cable TV Consumer Protection Act. Subcommittee members previously heard testimony from consumers.   The hearing started with opening remarks by Senators Inouye and Exon. Mr. Hunt said that competition is better than regulation for promoting customer service and technological advancements in the cable industry. He also said that the market is not biased in favor of telephone companies. Mr. Collins said that the legislation was a quick fix and that a long term solution requires competition beyond regulation. He said that the limitations on telephone companies in regards to carrying cable programming. He said that lifting these limitations will increase competition without directly harming cable companies. He talked about the monopolies enjoyed by cable companies and noted that Congress at least should remove the legal disincentives against phone companies for entering cable. He defined the terms being used in the legislation. Mr. Foster talked about the benefits of an integrated, broadband network. He said that legal restrictions needed to be removed to allow investment into broadband networks. He said that telephone companies are prohibited from packaging and marketing content developed entirely by others, which he said forced telephone companies to be passive transmitters of cable. He said that a common carrier network was optimum. He advocated for the ability of telephone companies to be allowed to compete for video transmission. Mr. Gillett talked about the value and future of fiber optics as a vehicle for transmission. He said that information can be delivered through a combination of cable and telephone networks without using excessive amounts of fiber optics. He disagreed with the "fiber-to-the-home" plans for technical and economic reasons. Mr. Verveer said that giving telephone companies an expanded role in the television business would lead to divestiture in the telephone comp...