The Markey Amendment to HR 4201 Religious Broadcasting Would Have Radically Changed Public Boradcasting

THE MARKEY AMENDMENT WOULD HAVE RADICALLY
CHANGE PUBLIC BROADCASTING

SUBJECTt: NONCOMMERCIAL BROADCASTING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION ACT OF 2000 (House of Representatives - June 20, 2000)

Following are excerpts from a recent debate in the House of Representatives over an Amendment named the MARKEY AMENDMENT. Had it passed, it would have given the Federal Communications Commission [FCC] the ability to control content of religious broadcasting on Public Broadcasting Stations [PBS].

The Amendment was defeated in the House but it is not over. The organizations that are behind this AMENDMENT are the Public School System in conjunction with the INTERFAITH ALLIANCE and THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES and the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations.

NOTE: The Interfaith Alliance is connected to the United Nations and it would like nothing more than to get free access to the public to teach the new agenda of UNITED RELIGIONS that is part of the network.

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Noncommercial Broadcasting Freedom of Expression Act of 2000'.

SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION OF SERVICE OBLIGATIONS OF NONCOMMERCIAL EDUCATIONAL OR PUBLIC BROADCAST STATIONS.
(a) Service Conditions: Section 309 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 309) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
`(m) Service Conditions on Noncommercial Educational and Public Broadcast Stations:

`(1) In general: A nonprofit educational organization shall be eligible to hold a noncommercial educational radio or television license if the station is used primarily to broadcast material that the organization determines serves an educational, instructional, cultural, or educational religious purpose (or any combination of such purposes) in the station's community of license, unless that determination is arbitrary or unreasonable.

`(2) Additional content-based requirements prohibited: The Commission shall not--

`(A) impose or enforce any quantitative requirement on noncommercial educational radio or television licenses based on the number of hours of programming that serve educational, instructional, cultural, or religious purposes; or

`(B) impose or enforce any other requirement on the content of the programming broadcast by a licensee, permittee, or applicant for a noncommercial educational radio or television license that is not imposed and enforced on a licensee, permittee, or applicant for a commercial radio or television license, respectively.

Pursuant to House Resolution 527, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) each will control 30 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Mr. MARKEY ".. This amendment is very straightforward and very simple. It restores the word `educational' in two key areas. First, in establishing eligibility to obtain a noncommercial educational license, a public TV station, it stipulates that one must not merely be any nonprofit organization but rather a nonprofit educational organization.

Secondly, it restores the educational basis for the programming by adding the word `educational' before the word `religious' in the underlying legislation.

Following are excerpts from a recent debate in the House of Representatives. The Amendment was defeated in the House but it is not over. The organizations that are behind this AMENDMENT are the Public School System in conjunction with the INTERFAITH ALLIANCE and THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES and the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations.

NOTE: The Interfaith Alliance is connected to the United Nations and it would like nothing more than to get free access to the public to teach the new agenda of UNITED RELIGIONS that is part of the network.

Mr. Tauzin: "What I have said, what I will continue to say, is that what the FCC did in December was stupid. It tried to inject government decisions into what was proper religious programming on a religious broadcast station. We ought to put a stop to that. It ought to be the decisions of the religious programmers themselves to decide what religious programming they are going to put on television and radio stations dedicated to religious programming.

Mr. Speaker, the FCC did something very different in December. Up until December, it was always the presumption that religious programming was presumed to be educational. I happen to think it is. The FCC thought it was for years and years, never questioned it.

Then in December it decided it was going to set up two categories of religious programming: educational religious programming and I guess noneducational religious programming. If there was not enough of one or too much of the other, they would shut them down.

What an offensive, arbitrary decision by the FCC, which is supposed to be carrying out the law, not making up their own law, not deciding as a matter of law what was good religious speech on television and radio and what was unacceptable. That is wrong. That is what is wrong. That is what is unconstitutional.

This bill will end it. It will not only say to the FCC, you cannot do it in the dead of night without public input and proceedings; it will say, you cannot ever do it again.

The gentleman's amendment will give them the right to do it again. The gentleman's amendment says, exactly as the FCC wanted to say, that there are two categories of religious broadcasting, one educational religious, and then something else. They do not define it, do not know what it is, and guess who defines it under the gentleman's amendment? The same FCC that did the stupid thing they did in December.

That is the reason the gentleman's amendment needs to be defeated; not because the gentleman had bad motives, not because our side has better or weaker motives than the gentleman, but because the amendment is wrong. It gives the FCC the power to do the stupid thing they tried to do in December. That amendment needs to be defeated.

Mr. MARKEY. "Mr. Speaker, this issue is historic in its nature. Many on the other side contend that they support the historic mission of the public broadcasting stations across the United States. Yet, in their amendment, their bill, they are going to remove the educational requirement for public broadcasting stations across the country, remove it.

"No longer will there be a mandate that as part of the stewardship, part of the responsibility of controlling a public broadcasting station, that those individuals must serve the educational needs of the entire community. They are removing that. It is without question the core principle, the constitution that underlies the foundation of the public broadcasting stations in our country.

"That is why the national PTA opposes their bill and supports the Markey amendment, the national PTA, the teachers, and the parents; and the National Education Association as well, and the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations, the Interfaith Alliance, the National Council of Churches of Christ. All of them support the Markey amendment and oppose the underlying bill.

"The reason is that they have removed the educational requirement from educational TV. They are going to allow for religion to be the only thing which is on a public broadcasting station all day long, regardless of whether or not it has any educational content whatsoever.

"Even though we concede that under existing law, existing law, that religious organizations are able to run and do run very well public broadcasting stations across this country, and they include a religious component to the maintenance of those TV stations, and that is fine. That should continue. Whether it be Christmas mass or Handel's Messiah, it should stay on public broadcasting TV stations. We agree with that.

"Where we disagree and where the Markey amendment is so important is that we must ensure that the religious component does not replace the educational role as the primary responsibility of public broadcasting stations in this country."

See the whole debate by giving keyword FCC or HR 4201 at http://thomas.loc.gov

NOTE: It is expected that this rejection of the MARKEY AMENDMENT will be deemed unconstitutional at the Supreme Court with the coming Hate Crime legislation. They insist that proselytizing cannot be considered to be educational.

TBN had a stake in this. The FCC granted 24 new television stations to TBN within the U.S. after this decision. Paul Crouch said that it was the largest grant EVER by the FCC.

BACK