|
Women's Rights
What's New? - Archive
WomenMatter will continuously post updates on all this and other issues as we monitor the continuing philosophical and practical debates nationwide.
Please check back often for updates. Past updates are available for reference on the Women's Rights Archives page.
Since Women's Rights is in many ways an umbrella issue, WomenMatter will highlight related updates from other Life Issue areas here:
Trying to Keep TV Free: The Latest on FCC Regulations
In June 2003, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) eased regulations on the media industry, allowing conglomerates to grow and expand in new ways.
The new rules allow a megacompany like Disney, Viacom, or News Corp. to control up to 45% of media dissemination (instead of 35%) and to own both newspapers and TV stations within a single market.
Free v. free
The FCC made the changes in order to help broadcast television compete with cable television. The FCC chairman, Michael Powell (Colin Powell's son) claims that the new rules are merely a moderate shift that will help to keep broadcast TV free. By "free," Powell means that the public can continue to see ABC, NBC, CBS, and other public channels with an antenna only; the public will not have to pay for them directly.
Opponents are also concerned about TV being free, but by "free" they mean open to diverse opinions. Groups as varied as the National Organization of Women, the National Rifle Association, and the National Council of Churches agree that media deregulation will silence alternative and activist voices. (For a detailed discussion of the FCC regulations, click here.)
Response from Congress: the amendment
On July 23, 2003, The House of Representatives voted 400-21 to block the new rule that would allow media conglomerates to buy more TV stations. The repeal was an amendment to a spending bill that provides funds to the Commerce, Justice, and State Departments. Therefore, it would be difficult for President Bush to veto.
On September 4, 2003, the same bill was introduced to the Senate, where it is expected to pass. In the Senate, there is broad bipartisan support of repealing the new FCC regulations. In order to prevent the new rules from taking effect, the Senate has decided to exercise a rarely used power granted to them by the Congressional Review Act of 1996, otherwise known as the CRA.
Response from Congress: the CRA
The Congressional Review Act of 1996 enables Congress to review and reject a federal agency's policy. All agencies are presidential appointments in the Executive branch of government. The Senate has decided to utilize its check-and-balance power in order to throw out the new FCC rules. On September 11, Senator Byron L. Dorgan, a Democrat from North Dakota, sponsored the resolution of disapproval. It was co-sponsored by Senator Trent Lott, a Republican from Mississippi, and John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts.
A resolution of disapproval does not have to go through committee and cannot be filibustered. It goes straight to the Senate floor for a vote. That vote occurred September 16, 2003, and the resolution was passed by a vote of 55 to 40.
What happens now
The resolution will now go to the House of Representatives, where it does not have such broad support. Even if it passes, it is likely to be vetoed by President Bush, who has vowed to support the FCC re-regulations.
However, it is likely that at least one of the new FCC rules will be blocked by Congress. The amendment to the Commerce, Justice, and State department spending bill prevents media conglomerates from controlling 45% of the airwaves. It limits them to the previous 35%. This amendment is likely to pass.
Public opinion matters to House representatives and the president. You can contact them with your opinion by clicking here. You can also read a detailed account of the FCC re-regulations by clicking here Check back with WomenMatter. We will follow the resolution to the House and The White House.
Article Posted on: 9/22/2003
click here to go to next section
return
to top
|
