Amendment One: YOU Can
Rock the World!
|
|
|
| Site
Highlights: XML/RSS
Feed Site Search News
Archives Latest
Schnazz FCC
Watch Media
Collage A/V
Library Features
Index Links
Directory Mbanna Kantako |
It shouldn’t have happened, but it did. Congress was supposed to have begun a 3-month break on October 3. It was supposed to have packed up and gone home by now, leaving “On Hold” (until January) the ongoing efforts to restore the FCC’s previously applicable media ownership ceilings. Instead, Congress is still in Session on October 22, with every indication that it will keep working into next week or even early November. Meanwhile, Representative Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) has collected the signatures of 190 Representatives on a letter to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-IN). The letter urges Speaker Hastert, and the rest of the Republican leadership of the House, to allow a re-vote on restoring ALL of the FCC’s previous media ownership ceilings -- including cross-media ownership caps that President Bush and FCC Chairman Powell have been laboring to weaken at all costs. THE GOOD NEWS is: Representative Hinchey
needs only 28 more Representatives to have a majority of the House
of Representatives on his letter to the THE BAD NEWS is: Representative Hinchey is running out of time. A member of the his staff told me recently that, given Congressional scheduling, “The Congressman has to send out that letter next week” -- with or without the 28 additional signatures he needs to prove he speaks for the majority of the House. That explains why I have written this Special Edition of the AMENDMENT ONE column. This Special Edition will not replace the “regular” installment in early November. It is, rather, an exceptional effort to seize an exceptional opportunity. Representative Hinchey needs your help NOW: basically, as soon as you read these words. He needs you to Fax or E-Mail your Representative. Pronto. TO HELP YOU DO THIS, I HAVE PROVIDED 3 LOBBYING TOOLS: (1) As a separate Supplement, I have provided a list, drawn directly from Representative Hinchey’s office, of the 190 Congressional Representatives who have signed the Congressman’s letter as of Tuesday, October 21. If your Representative is on the list, Fax or E-Mail him or her to say “Thank you!!” If your Representative is not on the list, Fax or E-Mail him or her to say: “Get With The Program!!” (2) At the end of this article, I have provided SAMPLE FAX OR E-MAIL TEXT which you can use -- if you wish -- in contacting your Representative. (3) IF YOU LIVE IN ALASKA, OREGON, ARIZONA, MONTANA, MINNESOTA, GEORGIA, FLORIDA, NORTH CAROLINA, MASSACHUSETTS OR VERMONT: I have also provided ADDITIONAL SAMPLE FAX OR E-MAIL TEXT which you can use in contacting one (or, in the case of Alaska, two) of the 11 key “swing votes” in the Senate. The situation is so fluid that we have to plan for the possibility that action might suddenly swing back from the House to the Senate … If all of these 11 “swing vote” Senators get Back On Track, we will have a “veto proof” Senate. This reality, in itself, will reduce the odds that a Presidential veto will happen. Remember: It isn’t the media reform movement that has kept Congress in Session for 3 weeks past its “target date” for going home. For that, we can thank the President’s surprise request for another $87 billion to spend in Iraq and Afghanistan -- plus the inability of the conservative Republican House of Representatives to reach an agreement with the moderate Republican Senate on prescription drug coverage. However, it is the media reform movement -- taking the form of Faxes and E-Mails to Congress from people like you -- that has allowed Representative Hinchey to move in 2 weeks from 120 signatures on his letter to 190. People like YOU have made this possible. Now we need another surge of Congressional contact -- to gain those last 28 signatures for Representative Hinchey!! If Representative Hinchey can go from 190 signatures to 218 signatures, before his time runs out, his letter will force Speaker Hastert and the other House Republican leaders to either allow a re-vote or else make the politically damaging admission that they do not care what the majority of the House wants to do. Should the House Republican leaders allow a re-vote, the House will then echo the earlier vote of the Senate -- and the total restoration of media ownership caps will go directly to the desk of President Bush. Although the President’s staff has publicly recommended a veto of such legislation, the President cannot veto it without paying the price of great political damage at a time when he has already lost public support over Iraq and the economy. Even the “worst case” scenario isn’t that bad, if we can point to 218 signatures on Representative Hinchey’s letter. Should the House Republican leaders deny a re-vote, even in the face of a written request by the majority of House Members, then Republican Representatives can be asked by constituents, all through their multi-month break, why they have voted to elect House leaders who are so autocratic. Such questions, if asked often enough by enough people like you, may finally put rank-and-file House Republicans in a mood to tell their leaders to stop acting like dictators. Maybe they’ll even elect new House leaders in January … Well, I can dream, can’t I? Meanwhile, over in the ongoing court case in Philadelphia: 218 of 435 Congressional Representatives on the Hinchey letter (or more), added to the 55-40 vote in the Senate for total restoration of media ownership ceilings, could constitute powerful ammunition for lawyers on the side of media reform. After all, a key question in this court case is whether the FCC correctly interpreted the applicable statute -- that is, Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 -- when it decided, on a 3-2 “party line” vote, to loosen the previous media ownership ceilings. This question raises, in turn, the question of what Congress intended when it wrote the applicable statute. How can the NAB argue that Congress intended the FCC to act as it did, when and if majorities in both Houses of Congress have gone On The Record as trying to overturn all of the FCC’s decision? In short: Getting 28 more Congressional
Representatives to sign the Hinchey letter is well worth the effort.
Under the best circumstances, it might
lead to the total restoration of media ownership ceilings in less than
a month.
Even under the worst circumstances, however, it could still provide
powerful political ammunition for a renewed campaign when Congress
re-convenes
in January -- and it could help us to win the court case, if matters
go that
far. IF YOUR U.S. REPRESENTATIVE HAS SIGNED THE HINCHEY LETTER … TO: Representative ___________ I am one of your constituents, residing in _____________. I want to thank you for signing Congressman Hinchey’s letter to House Speaker Hastert, which asks the Speaker to allow a House floor re-vote on action to restore all of the FCC’s previously applicable media ownership ceilings. Action to restore the TV ownership caps is not enough. Please understand that I view the Hinchey letter as a vital effort to defend the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. I appreciate your willingness to fight for the free flow of information and ideas in our representative democracy. [IF YOU KNOW THAT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IS A REPUBLICAN, PLEASE ADD: I also know it was not easy for you, as a Republican, to challenge your party’s leaders in the House. I commend you.] IF YOUR U.S. REPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT SIGNED THE LETTER … TO: Representative ___________ I am one of your constituents, residing in ____________. I am disappointed you have not yet signed Congressman Hinchey’s letter to House Speaker Hastert, which asks the Speaker to allow a House floor re-vote restoring all of the FCC’s previously applicable media ownership ceilings. Action to restore the TV ownership caps is not enough. Please understand that I view the Hinchey letter as a vital effort to defend the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. [IF YOU KNOW THAT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IS A REPUBLICAN, PLEASE ADD: I know it is not easy for you, as a Republican, to challenge your party’s leaders in the House. However, the people of your Congressional District elected you to represent us. We did not elect you to let the leaders of your party do your thinking for you.] SAMPLE TEXT FOR FAXING OR E-MAILING ONE OF THE 11 SENATORS WHO ARE “SWING VOTES” ON RESTORING MEDIA OWNERSHIP CEILINGS Go to www.senate.gov SAMPLE TEXT FOR THOSE
WHO ARE REPRESENTED BY: TO: Senator _________ I am one of your constituents, residing in ___________. I was disappointed when you recently voted “No” on a Resolution Of Disapproval, introduced by Senator Byron Dorgan, to restore all of the FCC’s previously applicable ceilings on media ownership. I was also puzzled -- since, prior to the vote, you had indicated on the public record that you supported the total restoration of media ownership ceilings. I have since
been informed that you voted “No” for
jurisdictional reasons: that is, to preserve
the jurisdictional primacy of the Senate’s
Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. Please understand that I regard legislation which restores media ownership ceilings, across the board, as a vital effort to defend the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. In light of the profound gravity of the current situation, your present focus on jurisdictional “turfing” reminds me of a firefighter, awakened by a piercing alarm bell in the dead of night, who races to the scene of a burning house -- and then refuses to turn on the hose until he is assured of overtime pay. When this issue arises again: Please re-think your priorities, look beyond purely jurisdictional concerns and do what it takes to save free speech in America. Thank you. SAMPLE TEXT FOR
THOSE WHO ARE REPRESENTED BY SENATOR
PATRICK LEAHY, D-VERMONT I am one of your constituents, residing in ________. I was disappointed when you recently skipped the vote on a Resolution Of Disapproval, introduced by Senator Byron Dorgan, to restore all of the FCC’s previously applicable media ownership ceilings. My disappointment was particularly keen because, prior to the vote, you had indicated on the public record that you supported the total restoration of media ownership ceilings. The other 3 Democratic Senators who skipped the vote, after first promising to support the total restoration of media ownership ceilings, at least had the semi-excuse of running for President. Your absence from the Senate, however, was completely unexplained. Please understand that I view legislation to restore media ownership ceilings, across the board, as a vital effort to defend the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. It is difficult for me to comprehend why you would be “Missing In Action” during a crucial battle, with such high stakes for the citizens of America. When this issue arises again: Please show up for battle this time, and fight for the free speech of those who elected you. Thank you. SAMPLE
TEXT FOR THOSE
WHO ARE REPRESENTED BY: I am one of your constituents, residing in ________. I was disappointed when you recently skipped the vote on a Resolution Of Disapproval, introduced by Senator Byron Dorgan, to restore all of the FCC’s previously applicable media ownership ceilings. My disappointment was particularly keen because, prior to the vote, you had indicated on the public record that you supported the total restoration of media ownership ceilings. Please understand that I view legislation to restore media ownership ceilings, across the board, as a vital effort to defend the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Even running for President is second to saving the Constitution. When this issue arises
again: Please show
up for battle
this time, and
fight for
the free
speech
of those who
elected you. Thank
you.SAMPLE TEXT
FOR THOSE
WHO ARE REPRESENTED
BY I wish you had shown up for the vote -- and voted “Yes”. Please understand that I view legislation to restore media ownership ceilings, across the board, as a vital effort to defend the First and Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution. It is difficult for me to understand why you would be “Missing In Action” during such a crucial battle, with such high stakes for the citizens of America. When this issue arises again: Please stand up and be counted this time -- and, when you do, make sure you are counted for the free speech for those who elected you. COPYRIGHT 2003 BY DON SCHELLHARDT |