PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 7, 2009
Community Access Preservation Act or the CAP Act - Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to require, with a specified waiver authority, that public, educational, and government (PEG) channels be: (1) carried in the same channel capacity as local commercial television channels, or if no such stations are required to be carried, in the same channel capacity as network-affiliated commercial television stations carried on cable; and (2) provided to every cable subscriber without additional service or equipment charges.
Requires a cable operator to: (1) carry PEG signals to subscribers without material degradation and without altering content; and (2) provide facilities adequate to fulfill such requirements.
Requires cable operators in states that have adopted statewide franchising to: (1) make PEG support payments equal to the greater of the cash payment required under state law or the value of historically-provided PEG support; (2) carry PEG signals from the point of origin to subscribers; and (3) provide at least the number of channels for PEG use provided as of May 31, 2005.
People & committees
Rep. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI-2] · D–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3745 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3745 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3745 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3745 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.