See other Neocon Nuttery Articles
Title: Battle lines are drawn over conservative radio
Source:
The Hill
URL Source: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news ... ervative-radio-2007-10-03.html
Published: Oct 3, 2007
Author: Alexander Bolton
Post Date: 2007-10-03 11:31:13 by aristeides
Keywords: None
Views: 244
Comments: 5
Battle lines are drawn over conservative radio By Alexander Bolton House Republicans are threatening to launch a discharge petition on legislation that would ensure the future prosperity of conservative radio talk-show hosts but is expected to face opposition from Democratic leaders. On Monday evening, Republicans filed a rule with the House Rules Committee laying the groundwork for a petition that would force action on protecting radio from government regulation later this fall. The move comes at a time when Democrats have launched a coordinated attack on conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, accusing him of disparaging American troops critical of the Iraq war as “phony soldiers.” Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) has said broadcasters should be required to give listeners both sides of political issues so voters can make informed decisions. Conservatives fear that forcing stations to make equal time for liberal talk radio would cut into profits so severely that radio executives would choose to scale back on conservative programming to avoid rising costs and interference from the government. Republicans’ concern has grown as Democrats have waged a battle against Limbaugh in recent days. On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) sent a letter to the chief executive of Clear Channel Communications, Mark Mays, calling on him to denounce Limbaugh’s remarks. “If anyone ever doubted that there is enmity between Democrats and American talk radio, they need look no further than the personal attacks leveled on Rush Limbaugh on the floor of the Senate,” said Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), the sponsor of legislation shielding broadcasters from government interference. “I thought it astonishing that members of the U.S. Senate would engage in repeated and distorted personal attacks on a private citizen. It gives evidence of a level of frustration with conservative talk radio that is very troubling to anyone who cherishes the medium.” Pence, a former professional talk radio host, and Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), a radio station owner, on Monday sent letters to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) demanding a vote on the Broadcaster Freedom Act. In their letters, Pence and Walden cited broad support for their bill as well as a vote on an appropriations amendment earlier this year showing that many Democrats are wary of angering politically influential radio personalities such as Limbaugh. The Republican lawmakers gave Democratic leaders a deadline of the end of next week. “Over 200 of our colleagues have joined us as co-sponsors of this important measure,” Pence and Walden wrote. “Considering the significance associated with protecting free speech, we respectfully request that you schedule floor action on H.R. 2905 by Friday, October 12, 2007. While we may not always agree with those who are on the airwaves, as members of Congress and freedom-loving Americans, we should never back down from an opportunity to defend their rights or speak their piece.” Under House rules, members of the minority party can force House leaders to schedule a vote on controversial legislation by obtaining 218 signatures on a discharge petition. Democrats from conservative-leaning districts, such as Brad Ellsworth (Ind.) and Heath Shuler (N.C.), where conservative radio personalities enjoy higher visibility among voters, may face pressure at home to sign such a petition. Doing so would anger Democratic leaders because it would allow Republicans to seize control of the House agenda. At least 17 Democrats must sign a discharge petition to force a vote on the legislation. “I don’t think freedom is a partisan issue,” said Pence, who emphasized his efforts to build bipartisan support for the legislation. The Broadcaster Freedom Act would prohibit the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from setting rules and policies reinstating the so-called Fairness Doctrine. The doctrine, which the FCC abandoned in 1985, required broadcasters to present opposing viewpoints on controversial political issues. FCC regulators called for broadcasters to “make reasonable judgments in good faith” on how to present multiple viewpoints on controversial issues.” Conservatives fear that forcing stations to make equal time for liberal talk radio would cut into profits so severely that radio executives would choose to scale back on conservative programming to avoid rising costs and government interference. In addition to Durbin, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has said in recent months that she plans to review the legal aspects of reviving the Fairness Doctrine. Aides to Dingell, who chairs the House committee with primary jurisdiction over the FCC, have studied the issue as well, Democratic sources said. Every Republican in the House has sponsored Pence and Walden’s bill. Rep. John Yarmuth (Ky.), a former newspaper publisher, is the only Democrat to sign on so far. The bill’s sponsors believe they could pressure more Democrats to sign on to a discharge petition, especially as Election Day nears. At the end of June, 309 House lawmakers voted for an amendment to the Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill prohibiting the FCC from using federal funds to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine. Republicans say Congress must consider the Broadcaster Freedom Act now because the amendment the House passed several months ago has not yet become law. The Senate has yet to consider the Financial Services spending bill. Even if the Senate acts and the amendment concerning the Fairness Doctrine becomes law, the prohibition on the FCC using federal funds to ensure ideological balance in broadcasting would expire at the end of next September. The Broadcast Fairness Act would prohibit the resurrection of the doctrine any time in the future.
October 03, 2007
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Limbaugh's recent performance has hardly helped the prospects of this bill.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Regardless of what Limbaugh blathers, this bill..this idea...is pure communism. The whip made the blue list with this crap. [What's the blue list? It ain't a free Colt's football ticket.]
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Are you saying that we had pure Communism in this country before the Reagan administration abolished the Fairness Doctrine?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
It wasn't pure but we had it, absolutely, and still do.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Without government regulation granting exclusive rights to specific frequencies, commercial radio wouldn't even exist.
#2. To: aristeides (#0)
Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) has said broadcasters should be required to give listeners both sides of political issues so voters can make informed decisions.
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#3. To: IndieTX (#2)
Regardless of what Limbaugh blathers, this bill..this idea...is pure communism.
#4. To: aristeides (#3)
Are you saying that we had pure Communism in this country before the Reagan administration abolished the Fairness Doctrine?
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#5. To: aristeides (#0)
protecting radio from government regulation later this fall.
I've already said too much.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest