THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION STATEMENT IN REFERENCE TO CERTAIN TYPES OF RELIGIOUS BROADCASTING -- HON. CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING (Extensions of Remarks - January 31, 2000)

[Page: E37]
---

HON. CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, January 31, 2000

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, in December of last year, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) overstepped its bounds and authority by issuing statements that if enforced, would restrict certain types of religious broadcasting.

I am happy to report that the FCC reversed its decision on Friday. I applaud the decision of the FCC but am troubled that such a decision was ever made.

While issuing a ruling on a routine license transfer, the FCC editorialize about new, strict standards for educational programming that could have affected many non-commercial, educational television broadcasters. The FCC stated that ``religious exhortation, proselytizing, or statements of personnally-held religious views and beliefs generally would not qualify as `general education' programming. Thus, church services generally will not qualify as `general education' under our rules.''

It is arrogance of the highest form for the FCC to attempt to determine what is--and--what is not educational. The FCC's statements amount to an unconstitutional restriction on religious speech. This type of content regulation and suppression of religious expression is not acceptable. The FCC is neither qualified nor does it have any legal authority to engage in this sort of line drawing.

The FCC was established by the Communications Act of 1934 and is charged with regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable. The FCC's jurisdiction covers the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. possessions. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent United States government agency, directly responsible to Congress.

Shortly after reading the FCC's anti-religious statements, Reps. MIKE OXLEY, STEVE LARGENT, CLIFF STEARNS and I wrote the Chairman of the FCC to remind him that the FCC is still directly responsible to Congress and that he should reverse the anti-religious statements or he could stand by and see it overturned by Congressional action.

Last week, we introduced H.R. 3525--The Religious Broadcasting Freedom Act to overturn the ruling issued by the FCC and did so with over 60 cosponsors. The FCC is accountable to the Congress and I believe we have demonstrated that we will take decisive action when the FCC or any other federal agency exceeds its authority--and especially when such actions threaten our religious freedoms.

The FCC's action was an unprecedented action by a government agency in an attempt to decide what is acceptable religious programming and content. The fact is, it is not the place of any government agency to determine what is acceptable religious speech because religious freedom and freedom of speech are both protected by the Constitution.

I have heard from many religious broadcasters in Mississippi and across the country who expressed outrage at the FCC and their actions. I am pleased to tell them that we have stopped this un-Constitutional decision in its tracts. Yet, I urge my colleagues to remain vigilant. I assure you that if the FCC takes any actions that suggest they may attempt to pursue this action in any other format, I will fight it once again.
END