Committee Fails to Reach Accord on Telecom Bill : Legislation: Observers now say further action on the reform measure is likely to be put off until next year.

The chances that a long-debated telecommunications reform measure will gain final approval this year dimmed dramatically Tuesday as a House-Senate conference committee again failed to reach agreement on the massive bill.

With 1995 winding down, congressional leaders appear to be counting on the looming holidays to force lawmakers into making decisions that years of intense lobbying and debate have failed to produce. But many observers now say further action on the legislation--which aims to loosen regulations on the broadcast television, cable TV, long-distance and local telephone industries--will probably be put off until next year.

Although nearly everyone involved has for years agreed on the need to overhaul the nation’s outdated communications laws, it was not until this year that a bill was passed by both houses of Congress. But it is now in peril of coming apart as a result of industry pressure, political infighting and the threat of a presidential veto.

“It’s like trying to push Jell-O up a hill,” complained Sen. Larry Pressler (R-S.D.), who chairs the conference committee.

The 42-member committee met briefly Tuesday for the third time this fall. Some members appeared eager to begin debating unresolved issues--including the rules on media concentration and the standards governing local phone company entry into the long-distance business--and there was some discussion of controversial provisions affecting the burglar alarm industry.

But the majority of members cut debate short. They agreed to tentatively accept staff recommendations on 46 items, including a provision retaining cable rate regulation for three years and another--previously accepted--that requires TV manufacturers to install a special chip that would allow parents to block violent programs. They then voted to adjourn.

Because the committee failed to complete its work Tuesday, Rep. Thomas J. Bliley Jr. (R-Va.), chairman of the House Commerce Committee, said the House would have to reschedule the floor vote on a final bill.

“No way are we going to be ready for the floor on Thursday,” Bliley said.

The long-distance carriers and the Baby Bells took turns Tuesday blaming each other for the delay.

“For AT&T;, getting no legislation is better than getting anything that sets a clear path to our entry into long-distance,” said David Dorman, chief executive of Pacific Bell. “They just want to delay that as long as possible.”

Countered Mike Connolly, spokesman for the Competitive Long Distance Coalition: “It’s in our interest to move now rather than later. If anyone’s stalling, it’s the Bells.”

The bill would be the first major congressional revision of the communications law since 1934, and would affect the fate of companies from Internet providers and newspaper publishers to manufacturers of phone switches, suppliers of video programming and the powerful cable and telephone industries--as well as of consumers who buy the products and services.

To get such a complex bill through a phalanx of special interest groups, Bliley and Pressler have limited access to the crucial conference committee staff meetings to around two dozen people. Pressler has urged members who have concerns with the legislation to go up the chain of command with their political leadership rather than bring them before the entire 42-member conference committee.

That strategy has not gone over well with some conferees, who complained they have been left in the dark about the status of telecommunications reform. “It’s like a bag of smoke,” complained Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.). “My staff can’t get into meetings.”

Pressler and Bliley vowed to produce a bill before the end of the year, but it is not clear they can deliver a bill in time for the full Congress to approve it.

If Congress does not vote before the Christmas break, it could take up the same measure again next year. But supporters of telecommunications reform worry that without a deadline looming, the pressure will be off Congress to act.