Re: LPFM Rules

[Dib9@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/30/00 10:59:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu writes:

<< It all boils
 down to the same thing: the FCC can do whatever it wants provided it
 doesn't either (1) violate the constitution [see also /Pacifica/] or
 (2) violate the laws determining how the FCC is supposed to make
 regulations. >>

Your analysis is solid.  I'm also not a lawyer, but current licensees might 
have an argument that the FCC has engaged in an illegal taking of their 
property by reducing the value of their property by allowing additional 
interference.  I know that station owners are only licensees, but they are 
entitled to retain their licenses and their investment as long as they obey 
the rules.  It's probably a stretch, but those making the claim of regulatory 
"takings" have had some success in federal court in recent years.

I agree with those that have said here that the legal arguments against LPFM 
are a stretch and the NAB's best forum to oppose the rules is Congress.

-- Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine