Congress Passes Indecency Bill on 379-35 House Vote
The House voted 379-35 Wed. for an indecency bill the Senate cleared 2 weeks ago. It heads to the White House for an expected Presidential signature. The bill hikes maximum indecency fines on broadcasters to $325,000 from $32,500, giving the FCC “teeth” to police public airwaves, said House Telecom Subcommittee Chmn. Upton (R-Mich.), promoting the bill on the floor Tues. night.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Tougher fines are an important step -- but responsibility rests with parents to police their children’s viewing, said Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. Stevens (R- Alaska) at an NCTA meeting Wed. Stevens, who held hearings about how to police indecency on cable, satellite and the Internet, praised cable for a campaign on how to use parental controls. “This is a parental problem, not a government problem,” Stevens said. The campaign will boost understanding of tools at parents’ disposal, he said: “Parents are the key.” Many people wanted more govt. regulation in the bill, but he feels industry is on the right track, he said.
“What propelled me to act on this issue was my review of FCC rulings” on indecency, Upton said: “Public decorum on this floor prevents me from discussing the details,” but the documents describe “disgusting” prime time shows simulating teen orgies and similar material. “Broadcasters are stewards of the public airwaves and have a responsibility” to keep indecent material off the air, Upton said.
Many of the most “egregious” violators are owned by large media conglomerates unfazed by current fines, Upton said. The bigger fines mean the FCC “has teeth,” he said. The bill had wide bipartisan support, said Ranking Member Markey (D-Mass.). He called the bill straightforward, raising fines but leaving the definition of indecency to the FCC and courts.
The FCC needs to hone its indecency definitions, Rep. Walden (R-Ore.) said. Walden, who with his wife runs a small broadcasting business, said the rules should impart a clearer understanding of the limits. Recent FCC rulings have been “confusing,” with certain words deemed OK in a movie but not in a TV show, he said. “Broadcasters need clarification when fines are increased tenfold,” he said, adding guidance would prevent “inadvertent” indecency violations. Enacting the bill won’t address indecency on cable and satellite, he added.
Upton vowed to address Walden’s concerns, voicing mild disappointment that a bill (HR-310) he sponsored wasn’t taken up, despite passing the House last year 389-38. It would have raised fines to $500,000, permitted imposition of fines on individual artists and revoked repeat offenders’ licenses. House Commerce Committee Chmn. Barton (R-Tex.) tried to sway the leadership to conference on the Senate measure but lost out. “Our House bill was better, but you know what -- we need to get it done,” Upton said. The Senate bill, sponsored by Sen. Brownback (R-Kan.) passed by unanimous consent, a mark of its popularity with members, he said.
Rep. Watson (D-Cal.) called fines the wrong tack on media indecency. Alone in speaking publicly against the bill, she said the cure is more competition, not media dominated by a few powerful players. “A consolidated media market is bound to offer cheaply made, shocking entertainment,” she said: “We must work with our creative community to encourage quality content.” Watson is “disappointed” that the House and Senate “have chosen the easy route of fines rather than addressing the underlying cause,” she said.