[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 106 (Thursday, June 28, 2007)]
[House]
[Page H7345]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      FREE SPEECH VS. FAIR SPEECH

  (Mr. POE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. POE. Madam Speaker, the unfair ``Broadcast Fairness Doctrine'' 
has reappeared. It is an attempt by the feds to force radio stations to 
be fair and balanced by forcing broadcasters to air opposing views of 
public importance. Sounds good, but who's going to determine what fair 
is, the Federal fair police?
  Are we going to let a bunch of Potomac River bureaucrats determine if 
a radio station in Tomball, Texas is being fair when it discusses 
politics? Sounds like government control of speech to me. And fair 
means different things to different folks. It's too subjective a word 
for us to even agree on.
  The Fairness Doctrine would not even promote public discourse. It 
would, in fact, force radio broadcasters to do away with controversy 
and maybe go to airing 24-hour music like Willie Nelson's greatest 
hits. Oops. Someone here might say Willie's not fair and balanced.
  Anyway, the Constitution is clear. Congress, that's us, shall make no 
law abridging the freedom of speech. You notice, it doesn't guarantee 
fair speech.
  Our forefathers wrote that first amendment to prevent government 
control of our free speech. So this Fairness Doctrine is neither fair 
speech, free speech or constitutional speech.
  And that's just the way it is.

                          ____________________