[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 195 (Wednesday, December 19, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2605]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               SUPPORTING THE ``PERFORMANCE RIGHTS ACT''

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. DARRELL E. ISSA

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, December 18, 2007

  Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the ``Performance 
Rights Act,'' which was introduced today. This legislation, long in the 
making, has the simple goal of requiring that those who generate 
revenue from the use of music, pay for the use of music.
  Terrestrial broadcasters have a strong and meaningful relationship 
with the American public. There are few of us who do not have wonderful 
memories that are accompanied by music played over a radio, and fewer 
still who have not tuned in to hear news, traffic or emergency 
information. The American radio tradition is akin to apple pie or 
baseball. It is part of the American consciousness, and, with the help 
of HD radio, will remain so.
  Even so, the past few decades have seen huge changes in how people 
consume music. Terrestrial radio once dominated new music awareness. 
This fact meant that if a consumer wanted to buy a song, they were 
likely to hear it on the radio first. Radio therefore had a dramatic 
promotional impact on music sales. However, even at the outset of mass 
music broadcasting in the United States, when Congress exempted 
terrestrial radio from paying artists a royalty, terrestrial radio was 
making money off of artists' work and paying nothing for it.
  As time went on and records lost market share to 8-tracks, cassettes, 
CDs, and now MP3s, and terrestrial radio lost market share to cable 
radio, internet radio and satellite radio, consumer dependence upon 
terrestrial radio gradually decreased. Terrestrial radio no longer 
serves the same promotional role for music sales that it once did, but 
terrestrial radio is still exempt from paying a royalty to artists. 
Additionally, the other music platforms do pay for the right to 
broadcast music.
  The ``Performance Rights Act'' encourages parity in music 
broadcasting by requiring terrestrial broadcasters to pay for the music 
they use. Stations that gross over $1,250,000 will negotiate with 
artists to pay a fair royalty. ``Small'' stations, those grossing under 
that amount, can opt to pay a flat rate of $5,000. Public broadcasters 
can elect to pay a flat rate of $1,000. Talk radio that only uses music 
incidentally is exempt from paying as are religious services. All 
together, approximately 77 percent of all radio will have to pay 
artists virtually nothing to use music. This bill is not the boogeyman 
that detractors will make it out to be.
  However, this bill is, I believe, unfinished. The songs that 
individuals consume via terrestrial, satellite, cable, and internet 
radio contain the same notes and the same voices regardless of which 
platform does the broadcasting. Yet they pay different rates, sometimes 
vastly different rates. We need to look further into these disparities, 
and I look forward to working with Chairman Howard Berman and others on 
correcting any inconsistencies in current law.
  The arguments that supported exempting terrestrial radio from paying 
a performance right have been eroded by the passage of time and 
technological innovation. We all yearn for the nostalgia of yesteryear 
and American terrestrial radio is a big part of that, but our 
recollections of the past do not support injustices into the future. 
Radio has changed. Terrestrial radio should pay for the right to use 
the music from which it benefits.

                          ____________________