[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 11556-11558]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. McCAIN (for himself and Mr. Leahy):
  S. 2505. A bill to implement the recommendations of the Federal 
Communications Commission report to the Congress regarding low power FM 
service; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I rise today to introduce the Low Power 
Radio Act of 2004. This bill would allow the Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) to license Low Power FM stations on third adjacent 
channels to full power stations without limitations and eliminate the 
requirement that the FCC perform further testing on the economic impact 
of Low Power FM radio. Additionally, the bill seeks to protect stations 
that provide radio reading services, which some have suggested are more 
susceptible to interference than other stations because they are 
carried on a subcarrier frequency. I am pleased to be joined in this 
effort by Senator Leahy who is a co-sponsor of the bill. I thank him 
for his support.
  This bill would also right a serious wrong. Four years ago, Congress 
wrongly delayed the full implementation of a new community based radio 
service called ``Low Power FM'' due to broadcasters' grossly 
exaggerated claims of interference. The FCC recently found, based on 
data from an independent engineering study, that the broadcasters' 
claims of interference are groundless. As required, the FCC sent a 
report to Congress in February describing the study's results and 
suggesting legislative actions to further the growth of Low Power FM. 
This bill would implement these recommendations.
  In January 2000, the FCC launched Low Power FM radio service to 
``enhance locally focused community-oriented radio broadcasting.'' Low 
Power FM stations are just that--low power radio stations on the FM 
band that generally reach an audience within a 3.5 mile radius of the 
station's transmitter. In rural areas, this signal may not reach many 
people, but it provides rural citizens with another media outlet--
another voice in the market. In urban areas, this signal may reach 
hundreds of thousands of people and provide not just local content, but 
very specific neighborhood news and information.
  Localism is increasingly important in today's changing media 
landscape. Rampant ownership consolidation has taken place in the radio 
industry since passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Since 
that time, many Americans have complained that the large media 
conglomerates fail to serve local communities' interests and seem to 
use their local station license as a conduit to air national 
programming. Low Power FM was introduced, in part, to respond to such 
complaints.
  Low Power FM is an affordable broadcasting option for many community 
organizations because a full power radio station license is extremely 
expensive and broadcast spectrum is very scarce. In 2003, the average 
cost to acquire a commercial radio station was more than $2.5 million 
dollars.
  Between May 1999 and May 2000, the Commission received over 3,400 
applications for Low Power FM stations from non-commercial educational 
entities and community organizations. However, before the Commission 
could act on many of the applications for this new community service, 
broadcasters frightened legislators into halting the full 
implementation of Low Power FM. Broadcasters masqueraded their true 
concerns about competition from a real local radio broadcaster in 
thinly veiled claims of interference.
  Due to the broadcasters' subterfuge, Congress added language to a 
2000 appropriations bill requiring the FCC to hire an independent 
engineering firm to further study broadcasters' claims of interference. 
Well, the results are in! I am not happy to report that after spending 
almost two years and over two million dollars, the independent study 
revealed what the FCC and community groups had said all along: LPFM 
will do no harm to other broadcasters. The study has stripped the 
broadcasters of their veiled claims by concluding that Low Power FM 
stations on third adjacent channels would

[[Page 11557]]

cause virtually no interference to other broadcast stations.
  The broadcasters masquerade has now cost American taxpayers over two 
million dollars. This was two million dollars taken from the FCC's 
budget that could have been used to further study efficient spectrum 
use to promote public safety needs, process license applications 
faster, hire more high quality engineers for the FCC and much more. 
Perhaps, we should send a bill to the National Association of 
Broadcasters. Nevertheless, that is the past, and it is time to focus 
on the future.
  That brings us to the future of Low Power FM. The FCC, as required by 
the appropriations language, has reported the study's findings to 
Congress and recommends full implementation of Low Power FM. This bill 
simply follows the FCC's recommendation: begin licensing Low Power FM 
stations on third adjacent channels to full power stations without 
limitations. Additionally, the bill seeks to protect full power 
stations that provide radio reading services. It is estimated that 
about 1.1 million people in the U.S. are blind, and it is important to 
ensure this helpful radio reading service remains interference free.
  The enactment of this bill will immediately make available a number 
of Low Power FM frequencies. By some estimates, Congress' legislation 
delaying the full implementation, which mostly affected metropolitan 
areas, led to the elimination of half the Low Power FM applications 
filed during 2000.
  For example, Congress' action eliminated the LPFM slot in Fresno 
applied for by El Comite de los Pobres. The group had hoped to address 
the dearth of local programming for the Latino community by airing 
bilingual coverage of local issues. New Orleans' Music Business 
Institute's application was eliminated as well. The Music Business 
Institute teaches young people how to get into the music business. The 
Institute had planned to use the station to help start the musical 
careers of local artists, and to educate listeners about the city's 
jazz and blues musical heritage. Let's get these valuable stations on 
air.
  There are some wonderful LPFM stations that are up and running. A 
recent article published in The Nation called these stations, ``beacons 
of grassroots democracy.'' The article discussed WRFR in Rockland, 
Maine: ``Shunning the canned programming approach of Rockland's two 
Clear Channel stations, WRFR offers an array of local talent, tastes 
and interests, and was recently named Maine station of the year by a 
state music association. Although country music, a Maine favorite, is 
heavily represented, hardly any WRFR deejay restricts himself to a 
single era, genre or Top-40 play list.'' Started by a local city 
council member who was concerned about the lack of local media outlets 
in his town, today, WFRF has over half the city listening. This is what 
scares broadcasters about LPFM: competition.
  In 2000, the Southern Development Foundation established a Low Power 
FM station in Opelousas, Louisiana, which sponsors agriculture 
programs, leases land to farmers, raises money for scholarships for 
needy kids and helps citizens learn to read. The station director told 
a local community newsletter: ``You've got local radio stations that 
are owned by larger companies. There should be some programming 
concerning the music that is from here, and the people from here. But 
there's not.''
  I ask the public and commercial broadcasters to come clean and join 
us in promoting LPFM. More good radio brings about more radio listening 
and that's good for all broadcasters. Therefore, in the interests of 
would-be new broadcasters, existing broadcasters, but most of all, the 
listening public, I urge the enactment of the Low Power Radio Act of 
2004.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2505

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 led 
     to increased ownership consolidation in the radio industry.
       (2) At a hearing before the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation, on June 4, 2003, all 5 members 
     of the Federal Communications Commission testified that there 
     has been, in at least some local radio markets, too much 
     consolidation.
       (3) A commitment to localism--local operations, local 
     research, local management, locally originated programming, 
     local artists, and local news and events--would bolster radio 
     listening.
       (4) Local communities have sought to launch radio stations 
     to meet their local needs. However, due to the scarce amount 
     of spectrum available and the high cost of buying and running 
     a large station, many local communities are unable to 
     establish a radio station.
       (5) In 2003, the average cost to acquire a commercial radio 
     station was more than $2.5 million dollars.
       (6) In January, 2000, the Federal Communications Commission 
     authorized a new, affordable community radio service called 
     ``low power FM'' or ``LPFM'' to ``enhance locally focused 
     community-oriented radio broadcasting''.
       (7) Through the creation of LPFM, the Commission sought to 
     ``create opportunities for new voices on the air waves and to 
     allow local groups, including schools, churches and other 
     community-based organizations, to provide programming 
     responsive to local community needs and interests''.
       (8) The Commission made clear that the creation of LPFM 
     would not compromise the integrity of the FM radio band by 
     stating, ``We are committed to creating a low power FM radio 
     service only if it does not cause unacceptable interference 
     to existing radio service.''.
       (9) Small rural broadcasters were particularly concerned 
     about a lengthy and costly interference complaint process. 
     Therefore, in September, 2000, the Commission created a 
     simple process to address interference complaints regarding 
     LPFM stations on an expedited basis.
       (10) In December, 2000, Congress delayed the full 
     implementation of LPFM until an independent engineering study 
     was completed and reviewed. This delay was due to some 
     broadcasters' concerns that LPFM sen-ice would cause 
     interference in the FM band.
       (11) The delay prevented millions of Americans from having 
     a locally operated, community based radio station in their 
     neighborhood.
       (12) Approximately 300 LPFM stations were allowed to 
     proceed despite the congressional action. These stations are 
     currently on the air and are run by local government 
     agencies, groups promoting arts and education to immigrant 
     and indigenous peoples, artists, schools, religious 
     organizations, environmental groups, organizations promoting 
     literacy, and many other civically-oriented organizations.
       (13) After 2 years and the expenditure of $2,193,343 in 
     taxpayer dollars to conduct this study, the broadcasters' 
     concerns were demonstrated to be unsubstantiated.

     SEC. 2. REPEAL OF PRIOR LAW.

       Section 632 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and 
     State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations 
     Act, 2001, (Pub. Law 106-553; 114 Stat. 2762A-111) is 
     repealed.

     SEC. 3. MINIMUM DISTANCE SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS.

       The Federal Communications Commission shall modify its 
     rules to eliminate third-adjacent minimum distance separation 
     requirements between
       (1) low-power FM stations; and
       (2) full-service FM stations, FM translator stations, and 
     FM booster stations.

     SEC. 4. PROTECTION OF RADIO READING SERVICES.

       The Federal Communications Commission shall retain its 
     rules that provide third-adjacent channel protection for 
     full-power non-commercial FM stations that broadcast radio 
     reading services via a subcarrier frequency from potential 
     low-power FM station interference.

  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I am pleased today to join 
Senator McCain in introducing important legislation to increase the 
number of frequencies available for low power radio stations in 
America. Low power stations serve their communities with broadcasting 
that reflects local needs and local preferences. In this way, low power 
FM offers a valuable counterpoint to nationwide media consolidation. 
For this reason, I have been a strong supporter of low power FM for 
many years now. In fact, I recently urged FCC Chairman Powell to 
expedite licensing for new low power stations.
  Unfortunately, for many years now, the number of low power FM 
stations the FCC could license has been limited

[[Page 11558]]

by unrealistic and unnecessary rules requiring these small stations to 
find available frequencies far from any full power broadcaster. 
Interference must be avoided if we are to make use of the airwaves. The 
current rules, however, go beyond what is necessary to protect full 
power stations from interference, and instead protect them from 
competition. The focus of today's legislation is the so-called ``third-
adjacent rule,'' which requires that a low power station not broadcast 
within three frequency intervals of a full power station.
  For example, if a full power station were broadcasting at 101.1, the 
first-adjacent frequencies would be 99.9 and 101.3 and those would be 
unavailable for broadcasting. The second-adjacent frequencies would be 
99.7 and 101.5 and they too would be off-limits. Finally, the third-
adjacent frequencies would be 99.5 and 101.7, and under the current 
rule, those frequencies would also be unavailable. Thus, the existence 
of just one full power station effectively keeps low power radio from 
broadcasting anywhere between 99.5 and 101.7. It is easy to see how a 
radio dial can quickly become off-limits for any low power broadcaster.
  A recent study by the FCC concludes that this third-adjacent rule is 
not necessary to protect full power broadcasters from unreasonable 
interference. Our new bill simply implements those findings and 
conclusions. It eliminates the third-adjacent rule, and allows the FCC 
to license low power stations in accordance with its own studies and 
findings about potential interference from these stations.
  Of course, the need for low power FM radio must be balanced against 
other important uses of nearby frequencies. I have worked hard to 
protect reading services for the blind, and this bill protects those 
services by retaining the third-adjacent rule where such services would 
be affected. In addition, this bill protects commercial broadcasters of 
all sizes from actual interference by leaving intact the FCC's 
expedited interference claim review procedures.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to move this important 
bill forward, to strengthen local broadcasting.

                          ____________________