The Honorable William E. Kennard Chairman Federal
Communications Commission 445 12th Street,
S.W. Washington, DC 20554
Dear Chairman
Kennard:
We are in receipt of your letter
of January 12 regarding the FCC's
new restrictions on religious speech. We thank you for your unusually
rapid response to our
correspondence of January 6. Unfortunately, your letter fails to
address our fundamental concerns.
Your letter
states that "the Commission's decision in this case...does not establish new
rules, but simply clarifies long-standing FCC policy applicable to any
broadcaster seeking to use an NCE-reserved channel." Are you telling us
that the "additional guidance" in the Commission's order does not constitute a
departure from past policy? At least two of your fellow commissioners have
a very different view. Whether you call it a rule or a "clarification,"
the Commission's guidance is designed to force religious broadcasters seeking to
hold a noncommercial television license to cut back on traditional religious
programming (or "proselytizing," to use the Commission's term) and replace it
with FCC-approved educational content.
Your letter
goes on to claim that "these standards...never operate to prohibit the airing of
any particular noncommercial programming, religious or otherwise." Well
yes, actually, they do. As a condition of receiving its license, the
applicant in WQED Pittsburg (FCC 99-393) was compelled to cut back on its
religious content. Particular religious programming was eliminated from
the schedule. While it may not have been prohibited in the sense of being
specifically banned, the result is the same. It is not being aired.
This amounts to censorship of religious expression by other means.
Your
letter also neglected to address our concerns about the Commission's failure to
follow appropriate rulemaking procedures. As Commissioners Powell and
Furchtgott-Roth stated in their dissent in part, "we object to this guidance
because it makes a substantial change in the Commission policy toward
noncommercial licensees without the benefit of input from the broad class of
affected licensees." We also believe that an adjudicatory proceeding is
not the appropriate mechanism for executing a substantive change in Commission
policy, particularly on an initiative as questionable as the regulation of
religious content.
In view of the deep public concern over the Commission's
actions, and the apparent failure of the Commission to recognize its errors, we
have drafted legislation to
overturn the additional guidance of the order in WQED Pittsburg. A copy
has been provided to your staff. We would welcome your comments on the
measure.
Yours truly,
Michael G. Oxley
Fourth Ohio District
Chip Pickering
Third Mississippi
District
Steve Largent
First Oklahoma
District
Cliff Stearns
Sixth Florida
District
cc:
Commissioner Susan Ness Commissioner Harold
Furchtgott-Roth Commissioner Michael
Powell Commissioner Gloria
Tristani
