News Conference Regarding Vote on FCC Media Ownership Rules

HEADLINE: NEWS CONFERENCE REGARDING VOTE ON FCC MEDIA OWNERSHIP RULES WITH SENATOR BYRON DORGAN (D-ND); SENATOR TRENT LOTT (R-MS); SENATOR RUSS FEINGOLD (D-WI); AND SENATOR WAYNE ALLARD (R-CO)
 
LOCATION: SENATE RADIO-TV GALLERY

BODY:
SEN. DORGAN: Ladies and gentlemen, as you know, we've just completed the vote in the United States Senate on the resolution of disapproval of the FCC rules.

This is a rarely-used device here in the Congress. I think this is only the second occasion in which we have used the Congressional Review Act, which I call a legislative veto. It's a mechanism by which the Congress can take a look at a rule that is developed by a federal agency and, under the conditions that we describe today, the Congress can express its disapproval of that rule.

Now, it is required that this be done by the Senate and the House and go to the president, so this is the first step in that process. But make no mistake, this is a very big step, a very important step.

And I have felt very strongly that the FCC actions are wrong; they run counter to the public interest. And the broadcast ownership rules, if left in place by the FCC -- rules rather created by the FCC -- if left in place, would result in fewer and fewer companies and people determining what the American people see, hear and read.

And I don't think that's healthy. Our democracy is nourished by the free flow of information. And I really feel very strongly that in the area of broadcast, especially dealing with broadcast licenses, as well as cross-ownership of newspapers, the FCC rule runs directly in the wrong direction.

This vote was a very strong bipartisan vote. As you know, there were four senators absent for this vote who would have voted in favor of it, so that would have put us at 59 votes. It's a very strong bipartisan expression in the Senate that what the Federal Communications Commission has done is, in our judgment, wrong. What we've said very simply is "Do it again, do it over, and do it right this time."

Now, as I've said, this is the first step. It needs to go to the House of Representatives. I'll be glad to answer questions about that. But let me call on my colleague, Senator Lott, who has felt very strongly about this issue, and, as you can see from the vote, has worked very hard to achieve this result today. And I'm really pleased to have worked with Senator Lott on this issue.

Senator Lott?

SEN. LOTT: Thank you, Senator Dorgan. I thank you for your leadership. You noted that this is part of the process with regard to this particular procedure, but it's also a part of the bigger process.

The Commerce Committee has already acted on legislation in this area and it's pending before the Senate; could be called up and acted on. And then, of course, there is still the vehicle of an appropriations bill. But over the years I have objected sometimes when appropriators intervened in areas like this where the authorizing committees or other procedures could have been used.

This is an effort to make sure that we have taken advantage of every vehicle that we could use to get a result in this particular area. So we're working on this approval resolution. We're prepared to move authorization legislation. But if those do get stalled, we still have the appropriations process. And I think that our case is much stronger because we have used these other vehicles.

This was a significant vote. It was bipartisan. A dozen Republican senators did vote for the disapproval resolution. And that's in the face of opposition from the administration and some misinformation that did come out last week. There was some suggestion that this had to do in any way with the fairness doctrine. Let me just assure you it does not.

Some people might say, "Well, we should go back and take another look at the fairness doctrine." I don't agree with that. And this does not do that and it's not a prelude to that. So that kind of information did get out last week. It may have reflected two or three Republican votes. But it's still significant that we got the 55 votes with at least five senators, I believe, absent, four on your side plus one on our side.

So I'm very pleased with the vote and we will continue to work on it, because I think this is the right thing to do. This is a position I've held for many, many years. It's the position that we advocated in the 1996 Telecommunications Act. And we're continuing to be consistent.

And also I was worried about the process. This was not really given the consideration, the hearings, the opportunity for comment that it should have had. And so there are no hidden agendas here. I do feel very strongly, though, that a reasonable cap is in order, and also that cross-ownership limitations have served us well and should stay in place.

SEN. DORGAN: Senator Feingold was an original co-sponsor along with us. Senator Feingold.

SEN. FEINGOLD: I want to congratulate Senator Dorgan and Senator Lott and everyone else for this very heartening victory on this issue.

I'm not a big fan of the use of this CRA process. It shouldn't be overused. I didn't like it when it was first used. But if there ever was a time when it should have been used, this was it. As Senator Lott suggested, the amount of calls that came in, the communications to the FCC saying, "Hey, we need more time; we need to look at this thing" -- and they didn't respond; they just went right ahead.

You can't have rogue bureaucracies in this government just doing whatever they want and taking the law, like the Telecom Act of 1996, which I happen to have opposed, but taking it and taking it way beyond what I think was intended. And that's why I think it's appropriate to ask them to do it over again.

To put this in the broader context, I was very troubled when I heard over a year and a half ago about the concentration in the radio industry in particular, one company owning 1200 to 1400 radio stations. That was bad enough. But what these new rules do, as Senator Dorgan has eloquently pointed out throughout this process, is broadened it to the idea of one company or a couple of companies owning the radio, TV and newspapers in one town.

I can tell you, I've rarely seen a more spontaneous reaction from my constituents. I've tried to talk about this. But on their own, people have come to me and said, "We're worried. We're afraid that the voices that give us entertainment and information in our democracy are being taken away."

So this is a significant step. It's only the beginning. But if the people in our bureaucracy don't fear that a bipartisan group of 59 senators aren't happy with what they did, then something is truly wrong. I think they would begin to get the message.

SEN. DORGAN: I think the key here is the American people have won with this vote. This vote is clearly about the public interest. The public interest was not, in my judgment, considered in the FCC rule. They had one hearing, as my colleague indicated, in Richmond, Virginia; three-quarters of a million submissions from the American people opposed to the rule. So I think the American people clearly have won. And it's nice to see a bipartisan victory on the floor of the Senate on behalf of the public interest.

We were joined by Senator Allard on this vote. And Senator Hutchison was going to join us as well, and she could not come up because of a time problem. But Senator Allard, would you like to say a word?

SEN. ALLARD: Well, I would. And thank you very much. I want to thank you for your fine work. This was a bipartisan victory. And, again, the people spoke, and they spoke loudly, despite the fact that this particular resolution that was -- Senator Dorgan's resolution was opposed by the leadership in both parties, as well as the president.

And I think all of us have the general view that it's best to have news generated at the local level and have competition. I'm a free enterprise person. I'm a small businessman. And I love to see competition. And I hate to see monopolies develop. And it's a judgment call as to what percentage of the market do you take on before that. But I just think, personally, that the FCC was ill- advised on rules and regulations. So obviously I was delighted to see the outcome that we had on the floor.

I'll just say a brief comment about the Congressional Review Act, which we acted under, and that was passed in 1994 and provided for an opportunity for the members of Congress to review how the federal regulators did their job.

And if they were proposing rules and regulations that we disagreed with, this was an opportunity for the legislative branch to take back some control about those legislative issues. And so that's what we were acting was acting under the Congressional Review Act. And it's entirely appropriate. And so we'll look forward and see what happens now on the House side.

Thank you.

SEN. DORGAN: Any questions?

Q Senator Lott, you said that the House leadership is disinclined to move on this. What makes you think the House is going to take this up?

SEN. LOTT: Well, I can't really speak for the leadership. They may change their minds, or that may not be an accurate reflection of their intention, or they may be influenced by the membership themselves.

As I said the last time we were here, I've always been of the opinion that the troops will follow the leaders. But having been in the leadership, I can assure you the troops don't always follow the leaders. And this is a case where the rank-and-file members feel very strongly about this.

The point was made, I believe by Senator Allard, that the leadership on both sides of the aisle in the Senate opposed this resolution; that it got 55 votes, could have had 59 votes or more. And so the House will have to think it through.

And the House has already started speaking on this subject in the appropriations bills. In fact, they moved first. And I think they deserve some credit in the Appropriations Committee. And so this issue will be addressed, I believe, in the House one way or the other, just as it's going to be addressed in the Senate, perhaps at least a couple of times.

Q Senator Dorgan, Senator McCain did say -- (inaudible) -- on that floor that this was going to go nowhere in the House. Do you believe that -- (inaudible) -- I mean, -- (inaudible) -- the House floor will act on it. Have you gotten any indication that the House floor will act on it?

SEN. DORGAN: Well, Senator McCain could have said the same about the legislation he described that reported out of the Commerce Committee. It will reach the same impediment in the House of Representatives. It's clear, and I think all of us would admit, that there is some difficulty in the House.

But if you have watched the House of Representatives recently, although procedurally they have the capability to package things up a little more and perhaps have a little more discipline in the way they create outcomes in the House, they have lost on some very significant issues in the last four or five weeks in which Republicans and Democrats have come together and said, "No, no, we understand what leadership wants, but here's what we want."

And the fact is, whether it's Cuba travel -- I could name a number of them -- they've just lost. And I think what is going to happen is exactly what happened in the Senate. This boiled up. You know, this was a circumstance where three-quarters of a million people sent in comments to the FCC. And I think people around the country understand this issue. It kind of boiled up in the Senate. And I think the same is going to be true in the House of Representatives.

Now, you know, we don't run the House of Representatives. But what the Senate did today, I think, applies some pressure and allows the public interest and the American public to use that pressure to say to the House of Representatives, "We want some action on this. We want to see the House vote on this."

If that happens, if the House of Representatives votes on this resolution of disapproval, in my judgment it will pass by a significant margin.

SEN. LOTT: Just one last point, and then I've got to go to another meeting; I'll yield to these other gentlemen.

What they're defending here, those that oppose this resolution, are defending the FCC. They're defending the networks, the big chains. I think that this is a case where the people are very concerned and that that's why the majority of the Senate and I think probably a pretty good majority of the House has been taking the position they're taking, in spite of leadership and administration and variety of groups that oppose it. You can be castigated in editorials or no telling where. And I'm just pleased to see that this is a case where the process has worked and the people are being represented by the result.

SEN. DORGAN: Let me do correct for just a moment. We did have, on our side of the aisle, Senator Breaux and Senator Miller opposed it. But Senator Daschle did, in fact, vote for the resolution. I just wanted to make that clear.

Q (Inaudible) -- saying that the -- that they sent the message -- (inaudible) -- to go back and do it again. Now, the CRA says they can pass or they can promulgate a new rule that's essentially the same. So how can they go back and do it again if the CRA says they can't?

SEN. DORGAN: Well, substantially the same means that the United States Senate doesn't like a rule that says, "Let's have cross- ownership. Let's decide to allow virtually unregulated and unmitigated concentration."

I mean, the FCC has plenty of room to craft a rule that is thoughtful and represents the public interest. There's nothing in this resolution that prevents the FCC from writing a rule that represents some semblance of common sense.

I didn't take Latin. Did anybody here take Latin in school? But the best Latin words -- and I'm not even sure it means what I think it means -- to describe what the FCC did is "totus porkus," which I think means whole hog. They just gave everything that the big special interests wanted and then said, "Oh, by the way, let's stick in a couple of other things." That's the "totus porkus" approach to rule- making, and it is not in the public interest. And that may not even be Latin. (Laughter.)

Thank you very much.

Q (Off mike.)

SEN. DORGAN: Yes, one more. This resolution, I believe, goes to the House calendar and will -- does, indeed, if sponsored, goes to the House calendar, and hopefully it will be called up this afternoon. That's very unlikely.

Q (Off mike.)

SEN. DORGAN: I'm just kidding. It does go to the House calendar. But obviously there will be a lot of discussion among House leadership and others about this. But there are people in the House who feel very strongly in support of this resolution.

Q Does this -- (inaudible) -- not getting a veto-proof minority?

SEN. DORGAN: I don't think the president would want this to be his first veto. A resolution of disapproval, disapproving a rule that is so devoid of public interest, that is not the first veto this president will want to make.

I believe that if this can be considered in the House, it will pass the House of Representatives. And second, if it gets to the president's desk, I believe Mr. Rove and others would believe that this is not something that should represent the president's first veto.

Thank you very much.

Q Senator Dorgan, what do you think it means that you got Republicans to go against the president on this issue? (Inaudible.)

SEN. DORGAN: You know, you'd have to ask them that question. But this to me is not about politics. It's not about parties. It's about public policy and a very important bit of public policy for this country.

Thank you very much.