[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 105 (Tuesday, July 14, 2009)]
[House]
[Page H8029]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        ENSURE BROADCAST FREEDOM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Pence) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, the American people love a fair fight; and 
so do I, especially where the issues of the day are being debated. In a 
free market, though, fairness should always be determined based upon 
the equality of opportunity, not equality of results. Everyone should, 
in effect, have a chance to make their case.
  That's why it is so disturbing to many of us that some of the leading 
voices in Congress over the last 2 years have been calling for Congress 
to enforce an idea of fairness on the airwaves of America in the form 
of restoring the so-called fairness doctrine. But our Nation should 
always proceed with caution whenever some would achieve fairness by 
limiting the fairness of others.
  The American people cherish their freedom. It is, in effect, a blood-
bought right. There is totality of agreement on this floor about that. 
In fact, I believe that is why President Ronald Reagan repealed the so-
called fairness doctrine after it had been in place for almost four 
decades back in 1987. The fairness doctrine regulated the content of 
radio for much of the last century, and limited the ability of radio 
stations to deal with controversial issues without meeting a standard 
of equal time or balance or record keeping. As a result of that, as 
many of us old enough to remember will attest, talk radio as we know it 
today virtually did not exist before 1987.
  Well, with some of the talk of restoring the fairness doctrine to the 
law of the land, Congressman Greg Walden of Oregon and I have been 
working over the last 2 years to ensure broadcast freedom. We have 
authored the Broadcaster Freedom Act which is cosponsored by every 
Republican in the House of Representatives. This week we will bring to 
the floor a broadcaster freedom amendment as part of the Financial 
Services Appropriations bill. Many who are watching may not know that 
the Federal Communications Commission receives its entire budget 
through the Financial Services Appropriations bill, and we believe this 
is an opportune time, as we were able to do 2 years ago, to use the 
power of this Congress and the people in this Congress on both sides of 
the aisle to advocate for the freedom of the airwaves of America by 
limiting the ability of the Federal Communications Commission to bring 
back the so-called fairness doctrine.
  But first, for the uninformed, the fairness doctrine is something of 
an Orwellian and Depression-era Federal Communications Commission rule 
that was devised back in 1949. As I mentioned, it required radio 
broadcasters to present both sides of an opinion when discussing 
controversial topics. It put unelected bureaucrats at the FCC in charge 
of enforcement in determining what speech was legal. Because of lack of 
clarity in the commission's ruling, broadcasters more often than not 
opted to offer noncontroversial programs in lieu of hours of paperwork, 
countless legal fees, and a potential threat to their broadcast 
license.
  Recognizing the chilling effect the regulation was having on 
broadcast freedom, the FCC began to overturn its own ruling on the 
fairness doctrine in 1985. Following that change in policy and 
President Reagan's veto of attempts to reinstate it, the results have 
been dramatic.
  Think about it. Before the fairness doctrine was repealed, there were 
some 125 talk radio stations in America. Now there are more than 2,000. 
While names like Limbaugh, Hanity, Laura Ingraham, and other 
conservative giants are better known to many, the truth is when you 
look at the totality of the talk radio marketplace, from the local 
level to the regional level to the national level, there is an 
extraordinary diversity of opinion. Many progressive, moderate, and 
liberal programs succeed extraordinarily well at the local level in 
many markets around the country.
  Unfortunately, in spite of this recent history and the breakout of 
broadcast freedom since 1987, there has been talk in the last several 
years about the need to level the playing field of radio broadcasting 
by restoring the fairness doctrine. Let me say from my heart, I believe 
it is dangerous to suggest that a government bureaucracy would be a 
competent arbiter of free speech. As a former radio talk show host 
myself, I know personally what the fairness doctrine meant to radio 
back in the day, and I know it would ultimately muzzle what is the 
dynamic public discussion that we call talk radio in America today.
  Let me be clear on this. I believe the broadcaster freedom amendment 
that we will bring this week gives Members of this body an opportunity 
to say ``no'' to the fairness doctrine and to say ``no'' to a new 
iteration of it that takes the formation of regulations under the 
rubric of localism, I believe will be met by broad and bipartisan 
support. If memory serves, 2 years ago when I brought the Pence 
amendment banning the fairness doctrine from being implemented by the 
FCC, more than 305 Members of Congress voted for it, including 100 
Members of the Democrat majority.
  So I urge support for the broadcaster freedom amendment. Join us in 
embracing freedom on the airwaves of America.

                          ____________________