Re: FCC (was: Re: clear channel buys amfm)

[Dib9@aol.com]

Your analysis is solid (I agree that a 1st Amendment challenge would not 
stand up) and you are probably correct that the FCC has the legal authority 
to impose new limits but they couldn't do it due to political realities.  
Senator Burns, the Chair of the Communications Subcommittee, has already 
spoken out against the 40% rule that the Justice Department has been 
enforcing and he can make life tough for the FCC if they choose to cross him 
on ownership limits.

Also, any significant ownership limits would cause a huge economic upheaval 
in the industry.  That's something even Clinton/Gore would be concerned about 
and with their Hollywood friends now having big money invested in the 
industry, I don't even see the administration favoring any significant 
changes to the current ownership rules.

--Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine



In a message dated 10/6/99 9:54:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu writes:

<< The grounds potentially available for mounting such a challenge would be 
quite narrow.  >>