Posted on 09/17/2003 2:59:45 PM PDT by jmstein7
The Senate has indeed passed this resolution to overrule the FCC's new media ownership guidelines. This is the legislation that has the new reenactment of the Fairness Doctrine in it. The Senate voted to, in essence, go back to the old days and reject the new FCC guidelines. The vote was 55-40, and Trent Lott had what some people might consider a threat. He said that the president would be foolish to veto this. This now goes to the House, which is expected to pass it to the president. The FCC this past summer authorized new ownership guidelines, allowing for a little bit more flexibility in ownership, getting rid of some federal regulations that had been intact for years. So the Senate decided to roll them back, with many senators upset with local media and what they're saying about them.
What's happening here is typical. People who are afraid of less federal regulation and a more open market are out there saying that one company is going to end up owning all radio and TV stations in the country in order to gin up support for this - and they're trying to make people believe that that one company is going to be Fox. And there are dunderhead, idiot citizens out there who are falling for that lie.
How many issues have come up in the Senate this year? We've had the judges, the Democrat filibuster - a whole bunch of different things, and what is it that has gotten Republican senators really riled up? What is it that's gotten them motivated to actually do something? It's this media ownership business! Why can't these same Republicans find one particle of this same energy and time to fight over the future of the judiciary? Do something to defend these judges that are being filibustered. I would love to see that.
Instead, we get Republicans saying, "Well, we hope the Democrats will see the error of their ways and change their behavior." Right. But when something comes along they really don't like and that affects them personally like these new media rules, why, we see that they have the ability to mobilize, take action and dominate the Senate - which, they suddenly realize, they control. To be quite honest with you, this is a little frustrating. We have perfectly good people sent up as judicial nominees by the president - and, by the way, the White House hasn't fought for them all that much, either.
We have to be honest about this. Republicans, apparently, have no problem going after Big Tobacco and Big Oil, and now they're going after Big Media and little media alike. But when it comes to doing their jobs and protecting the Constitution or these nominees, they have other things to do. They just don't seem to have the same level of energy for such fights. They may think this media rule business is important, but to me, I don't see it as a priority over the judges. I don't see it as a priority over some of the other things - like the $400 billion prescription bill to make poor people buy drugs for billionaires.
The evidence here is that they can get in gear. They can get moving and actually do something as has been demonstrated with these media rules. But for some reason these other issues just don't seem to excite them. So there's a reason to be disgusted with these people. Look at what their priorities are. Their priorities are who owns and who doesn't own radio and TV stations in the free market. If the media rule idea had come along, and they had acted ho-hum and blasé about that, then we just could have concluded that they're ho-hum and blasé, but they're not. When they want to get their rear ends in gear, they do.
I think that this is just a ploy for Republicans like Lott to cast a meaningless vote that seems meaningful.
I beg to differ.
It would effectively kill conservative talk radio while allowing liberal TV (the Big 3 & CNN) to continue as usual.
I read the article that got Rush started on this kick, which clearly states that the Fairness Doctrine is not a part of this leglislation. Here is an excerpt and a link. http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004005
During July's House floor debate, Michigan Democrat John Dingell explained that once they roll back the FCC ownership expansion liberals can then move to reverse another recent FCC decision to allow companies to own TV stations and newspapers in the same market. They may then go to town on New York Representative Maurice Hinchey's proposal to revive the Fairness Doctrine and complicate life for both Fox and Rush.
I should have included this info in my first post. :-)
I know that Rush has been going on about this for days, and it doesn't do him or conservatives any good for him to be spreading untruths about this. I don't think that he's lying; I think that he's too emotionally involved to understand that the fairness doctrine is not embedded in this leglislation. He is, after all, a main target of all of this.
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.