Senate Approves Measure to Undo FCC Rules
fortheloveofjava writes "The Washington Post says here that the Senate voted 55 to 40 today to wipe out all of the Federal Communication Commission's controversial new media rules, employing a little used legislative tool for overturning agency regulations. If you signed the MOVEON.org petition, an image of part of it is visible here with sponsoring senators Senators Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and Trent Lott (R-MS)."
"Trent Lott (R-MS)." I dont know if this means that he is a member of Republicans for MicroSoft or if you mean that he is currently being posessed by Richard Stallman
The new FCC rules were championed by FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell, who argued that consolidation was less a threat now than when the rules were enacted because consumers have many more choices for their news and entertainment.
Sure, there's ClearChannel-Affiliate-1, ClearChannel-Affiliate-2, ClearChannel-Affiliate-3... Really, is there that much more choice out there? Internet broadcasting, maybe, but the folks who run their own stations are still being harassed by the tax-hungry powers-that-be.
I think you missed the point. They do dress like the people the represent. They just don't represent the people you think.
Remember kids: If you voice or even think an opinion contrary to your selected President, then the terrorists win.
The FCC has lawmaking power because Congress gave it to them. Legislative delegations of rulemaking authority to federal administrative agencies happen all the time; it's the same reason why the FTC is empowered create a do-not-call list and require telemarketers to pay a fine if they don't abide by it. In each case, the agency is exercising authority delegated to it by the legislature. Nothing new there.
The more interesting issue, IMHO, is why it's so hard for Congress to overturn an agency rule with which it disagrees. It used to be that you didn't have to pass a law to overturn an agency regulation; you could just have one house of Congress issue a so-called "legislative veto." If that was still the law, then today's Senate vote would have been enough to overturn the FCC. However, the Supreme Court has said you can't have a one-house legislative veto. So if the FCC makes a rule with which Congress disagrees, Congress has to pass a new law overturning the rule. Cumbersome, but that's how the Court has said you have to do it.
[insert randomly selected declaration of absolutist meta-moderation philosophy here]
why does this remind me of that episode where kent brockman is reading the news for CNNBCBS (a division of ABC)?
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
Really, the worst problem with media consolidation is the total loss of a sense of a local community, especially on the radio. I feel the major problem isn't TV, it is radio being taken over by ClearChannel, where people have to play their political games to get on the radio.
Just my .02
That's right. I generally happens every 10 years (in Texas at least).
The last time it happened, the situation had to be settled by a district court judge. That was in 2001.
Now the Texas Republicans want to redistrict again. They didn't like the last result so they're changing parliamentary rules in order to get their plan shoved through. This is all at the behest of the Bush Whitehouse.
It is not normal to redistrict every 2 years. This is what you do when you want to guarantee getting elected, because you've fscked the economy up so much that you can't get enough of the popular vote to carry you into office.
It's a bit like getting your brother to block minorities from voting in the state that he's running.
State Police headlight checks in minority neighbourhoods near the polling station on election day? Perfectly normal.
Scrubbing thousands of citizens from the voting rolls because their name sounds like that of a convicted felon in another state? Nothing to see here.
Stupid fsck.