Kucinich voted against letting FCC charge severe fines

[Eric J in MN]

Kucinich voted against letting FCC charge severe fines, but the bill passed the House anyway.

Now it is up to the Senate.

This bill to charge $500,000 per-incident of indecency could be used to drive Howard Stern and other critics of Bush off the air.

Please call your Senators against increasing FCC fines. It takes about 5 minuts. The free Capitol Switchboard number is:
1-800-839-5276

sample phone words:
Hello, can I speak with the office of Senator _______?

Hello, my name is ____, can I speak to someone about the FCC bill?

I'd like to leave a message for Senator _____, please vote against increasing FCC fines. Right now, we have a balance between fighting indecency and protecting freedom-of-speech. This bill would hurt freedom-of-speech.

----------
If you don't know the names of both your U.S. Senators, you can look them up at:
www.vote-smart.org
If you would like to read more about this issuse, go to "MoveLeft Media" at:
www.moveleft.com

[revcarol]

GREAT!!

You can always count on Dennis to have the right priorities!!

[KuroKensaki]

5. I want to ask Dennis..

He's voted on more than one occasion to add a Constitutional amendment to ban flag burning. I want to ask him why. That and his stances on abortion which are now in the past, are the only things I've ever disagreed with him on.

I'm not trying to sling mud, just trying to inform. Personally I am a huge Dennis fan. :P

[revcarol]

9. I'm so glad to have another DK fan here!!

He spoke about flag-burning(actually desecration of the flag) in Santa Fe.He believes that the flag is the symbol for ALL of us, not just protestors, not just the radical right, not just the muddled middle.So if it is the symbol for ALL of us...do we want the symbol for ALL of us desecrated?

I don't agree either, but I do understand his reasoning.

And he still remains OUTSTANDING for freedom of speech, and all the other things in the Bill of Rights!! That is why he wants to REPEAL the Patriot Act and break up media monopolies/oligopolies.(That's why he gets NO press!!)

[KuroKensaki]

11. Thank you, Carol

I figured it was something along those lines. Flag burning, however, in its traditional form of protest, isn't actually a desecration of the symbol... The proper way to destroy a flag that has been desecrated is by burning it. A flag becomes desecrated if it's touched the ground, been written on, is tattered, etc...

A flag burning protest (at least for some) is a symbolic gesture saying that by the actions of the government, the flag itself has become desecrated. In our case.. Because * has taken this country so far away from its ideals, he's basically pissed all over the American flag as a symbol itself. Burning the flag is thus what we should do to ALL flags.

Now, I don't burn flags, I never have, and probably never will, cause I don't think our symbol can ever become that desecrated. But that's the reasoning of some flag burners.

Of course, there ARE flag burners who burn the flag just to rebel against Middle America, or because they truly do hate America, which would in fact be desecration rather than protest, but they are a very, very small minority. I just think that it's dangerous to say that ANYTHING is going 'too far' with free speech.

[no name no slogan]

1. kick

because although the media blows, it's still the only one we have. And using idiotic laws like this to silence critics of the administration is just plain un-American.

[boobooday]

2. If we chose our nominee

Based on voting record alone, it would be KUCINICH, hands down! He always votes his principles.

http://www.wgoeshome.com

[redqueen]

3. What a concept, eh?

Voting your principles?

*sigh*

[LWolf]

24. If we chose our nominee based on

principles, Kucinich would win.

If we chose our nominee based on what's good for individual, every day people, Kucinich would win.

If we chose our nominee based on platform, he would win hands down.

So only a small percentage of us base our votes on principles or on issues affecting the people. A sad commentary.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. I don't agree

I'd have voted for the bill. Yeah, this might be used to drive Stern off the air, but at the same time, the laughable fines in place now have done nothing to stem the growing tide of indecency. I'm 100% against blocking free speech, don't get me wrong, but I feel that at the very least the free access broadcast networks on TV and radio need to be kept clean, as poor parents don't have options like the V-Chip to block out what they don't want their children watching.

Cable television and satellite radio, on the other hand, should be 100% fair game for anything and everything, because if you have that technology, you automatically have a way to keep your kids from viewing/hearing objectionable material. Whether or not you use it is your own problem.

[redqueen]

6. You seem to think these fines are used

You call them laughable, and blame their laughableness for the growing tide of indecency, but I ask you: how often do you think they're even levied against a company?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. I'm not an industry insider or anything,

So I don't know for sure, but from what I do understand from what I've read and people I know in the industry, the fines are used on a fairly regular basis. Even if they aren't, the effectiveness of a large fine in dissuading indecent content can't be overstated. No CEO wants to see his company bleeding money simply because his DJ can't keep his mouth shut.

[redqueen]

8. They're not

Check it out. Howard Stern is target #1, nobody else even comes close.

It's so pathetic... such an obvious sham... that they want to increase fines is what's laughable.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

12. Are you basing this on anything?

[redqueen]

13. Common knowledge!

Just tried to search for a cite, but the FCC's lax enforcement of these decency guidelines is legendary.

If I happen to find a good source I'll post it here or PM you. Stern actually used to rail about this himself quite a lot. How unfair it was that he got fined, when so and so did X. Come to think of it, his show could probabaly come up with a pretty good list!

[boobooday]

14. Of course they threw other garbage in the bill

Some of that might have also contributed to Kucinich's opposition.

However, restrictions on speech are a slippery slope, that ultimately end up with people like Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia deciding what has "artistic, political, social or literary value."

That scares me.

http://www.wgoeshome.com

[Eric J in MN]

22. "artistic, political, social or literary value" is a test for obscenity

"artistic, political, social or literary value" is part of a test for obscenity.

Something can be deemed "indecent" as long as it contains "patently offensive sexual or excretory references" and it's broadcast over the air. Even if it does have artisitc value.

[Mairead]

16. Poor parents have a very good way to cut down on the problem

unplug the damned tv and get the kids hooked on books.

I note, by the way, that the usual response by rightwinger is 'the market should decide'. Why isn't that the case here?

[L.A.dweller]

20. Here's an easy solution for ya:

Turn the station!

So, if you have satellite radio and cable tv you automatically have a way to keep your children from seeing/hearing "indecent" material; but if you have free access to broadcasts you don't?
That makes absolutely no sense. Either way the PARENT needs to monitor what their child is watching not the damn government.

[Nadienne]

10. The media being what the media is

- corporations, for the most part -

it wouldn't surprise me if some of the media are intentionally creating a problem that the "good and moral" bushtard can "fix" - and the solution gives the bush cabal leverage to silence disent...

[Eric J in MN]

21. The big media corporations don't want this bill. If enough of us

The big media corporations don't want this bill. If enough of us call our Senators, the Senators will realize regular citizens AREN'T unanimaous in wanting heavier FCC fines, and they can vote against a bill for heavier FCC fines for indecency.

[JohnKleeb]

15. no suprise

Thanks Dennis and those who voted no.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

17. I think everyone is missing what these fines can really damage.

These fines are NOTHING for mega broadcasting CORPS, thats even if they ever end up paying them.

WHAT IS TRULY THREATENED... NONCOMMERCIAL College and independent radio stations. The only alternative sources of information and music.

I worked at a college station for 12 years. Fines of this magnitude, which only require some "listener" to file a complaint, would destroy a small radio station completely. These stations couldn't afford to fight it either. Most of them are LISTENER-DONATION driven. They are noncommercial/nonprofit. Where I worked, the staff is 100% volunteer. We only had two rules: don't play commercial music and only play swear words during safe harbor times. We had public affairs shows like indymedia radio and such.

These fines are not meant to hurt the mega corps, they are meant to knock out the little guys until only the christian right and the megacorps run all the stations.


Just my thoughts

TWL

[redqueen]

18. Good points!

:kick:

[no name no slogan]

19. Thanks for the reminder

I had completely forgotten about that part of it, and I was a student DJ for four years in college!

A $500k fine is chump change to ClearChannel, Viacom or Fox. However, it could easily put your local independent station out of business.

And a :kick: because everybody needs to see this!

[Mairead]

23. EXCELLENT point, thank you TWL!~

That's exactly the deal--and with a little 'creative enforcement', which those same small stations couldn't even afford to fight, it would be the perfect law from the rightwing's perspective: silencing the last vestige's of opposition.

[DaveSZ]

25. Why is it?

That Dennis is often the only Dem with a spine?

He's a good man.

[Mairead]

26. "Why is Dennis often the only Dem with a spine?"

You know, that is an excellent question, Dave!! Why is he? I wonder whether it's related to his not having become a lawyer, or wealthy (i.e., could they all three come from the same 'defect' in his character).

[redqueen]

28. I don't know, but I've noticed he's pretty reliable

The others? Not so much.

[revcarol]

27. I called, even my (ick) Repug Senator,

did you?