Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Posted on 06/09/2006 2:38:02 PM PDT by Paul678
Bush Vows To Sign Indecency Act
FMQB
June 8, 2006
After years of debate, yesterday Congress passed a new bill upping the fines for FCC violations for indecency. The House Of Representatives approved the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2005 by a 379-35 vote, after it had already passed the Senate. The President released a statement yesterday, vowing to sign the bill into law.
"I believe that government has a responsibility to help strengthen families," said George W. Bush in a statement. "This legislation will make television and radio more family friendly by allowing the FCC to impose stiffer fines on broadcasters who air obscene or indecent programming."
Speaking on the new legislation, Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) said, "All we are doing is adding a few zeroes to the current level of fines; we do not change the current standards one bit," according to The Washington Post.
In a statement, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin praised the passing of the bill. Martin said, "I welcome Congress' decision to give the Commission increased fining authority in our efforts to protect children from inappropriate programming. Many parents are increasingly concerned about what is on television and radio today. Today's vote demonstrates that Congress shares their concern and has a clear desire for a more meaningful enforcement of our decency standard."
He added, "The Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act gives the Commission more tools to enable parents to watch television and listen to radio as a family. In addition, I believe that concerns regarding content should be addressed in a comprehensive fashion by empowering parents to choose the programming that comes into their homes."
Added FCC Commissioner Deborah Tate, "Congress has once again sent a firm message that the minds of our children are a national priority. Increased fines strengthen the FCC's ability to enforce the law. I take this responsibility very seriously. However, it will take more than cleaning up indecency to make television a positive force in our children's lives. We need to also give parents more choice in the channels sent into their homes, find ways to make our children more media literate, and promote the production of more positive, educational, and inspirational children's programming."
Jim Dyke, executive director of media organization TV Watch spoke out against the higher fines in a statement. "More government action doesn’t help parents figure out which TV shows are right for their families. Parental controls like the ratings and blocking technology provide the information that families need to choose appropriate TV shows and enforce their decisions. Asking the government to step into the role of playing parent is unnecessary.”
http://www.fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=227958
Must be an election year.
Here's an idea. Dismantle the FCC, privatize the airways, and allow what's left of the FCC to regulate signal strength and conflicts.
Allow the market to hash out the rest.
Darn. From the title, I thought it was going to mandate more indecency.
great news. Now it needs to be expanded to cable and the internet.
I really hope you're not serious.
Every other year is an election year. Do you propose that we only allow legislation in non-election years?
I admit I like the idea if only to cut down on the number of laws passed
I agree. I don't feel comfortable being able to decide for myself what to look at on cable and the Internet. I need the government making sure I'm not offended.
As for myself, I feel perfectly comfortable deciding what to look at on TV and the internet. However, I don't feel as comfortable with some of the choices others may make in that regard. I say put somebody in charge. Somebody like me.
Now, now, that makes entirely too much sense. When Republicans stood for smaller government it might have worked. But not now.
Uh, no. As far as both cable and the internet go, they have all those net blockers and they have V-chips. Now, we've utilized neither, but then again, it's our choice. The central government has no business telling me how to raise my children, has no business telling me what I am to watch and it has no business telling me what I can or cannot access online.
And watch the numbers spiral down....At least it didn't take me by surprise, since Bush is an old school Southern Democrat, a Republican in name only.
I'd have thought our tradition was more the other way around.
Yes, because all our fingers that would normally click the "off" button have been broken.
Thanks goodness for Big Mama Government to save me from myself. /s
Oh boy, more Nanny State operations.....
But, "It's for the Children"
Remind me again, which side is for smaller government?
Every other year is an election year. Do you propose that we only allow legislation in non-election years?
ping
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.