Posted: Tue., Oct. 5, 2004, 10:00pm PT

Pols say higher fines are indecent

Ensign claims FCC provisions holding up Defense bills

By SUSAN CRABTREE

WASHINGTON -- If several prominent senators have their way, broadcasters could be breathing a sigh of relief when it comes to Janet Jackson's flash-dance fallout.

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) is taking aim at a bill that would boost Federal Communication Commission broadcast indecency fines at least tenfold, from $27,500 a violation to between $275,000 and $500,000 per infraction with a cap of $3 million a day.

Bill was first introduced in the wake of the Jackson flap, then quickly passed the House and Senate, only to lie dormant for months awaiting a conference between the two bodies.

Sponsored by avowed Hollywood foe Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), legislation is now attached to must-pass Defense Dept. legislation in the Senate.

Ensign recently wrote a letter to Armed Services Committee chair John Warner (R-Va.), complaining that the indecency provisions are standing in the way of important military matters.

"They are presenting an unfortunate distraction to the important work we need to complete to combat terrorism, provide for our homeland defense and provide quality of life improvements for members of the armed forces," he wrote.

Ensign originally backed the bill as a member of the Commerce panel, where it originated. He did not, however, support amendments added in committee that would limit media ownership and force the FCC to study the impact of violent programming on kids. He is also wary of a provision that would hold artists and performers accountable to the same six-digit fines as the media companies and another that would trigger an automatic broadcast license-revocation hearing after three indecency infractions.

Ensign, as well as GOP Sens. George Allen (Va.), Conrad Burns (Mont.), John Cornyn (Texas), Gordon Smith (Ore.) and John Sununu (N.H.), all asked Warner to include only the fine increases or drop the bill entirely.

Parents Television Council prexy L. Brent Bozell blasted the request in a statement released Tuesday.

"Senator Ensign's rationale of 'form over substance' could prove to be the kiss of death for the fine increase," Bozell said. "This measure represents the only viable avenue for the indecency provision to become law during this congressional session."

A spokesman for the Armed Services panel did not return calls seeking comment.

It's really hard to understand a value system which holds that it's more important to protect people from exposure to an occasional dirty word or the momentary flash of a naked breast than it is to protect the country from military threats, especially so when protection for freedom of speech is specfically and deliberately written into the Constitution, and even more so when having a strong military has been one of the primary Republican positions for many decades.

I think some of these folks are certifiable. I dunno, maybe someone really did put something into the water back in the 70's.


Unrelated postscript: Some time on this day (Wednesday 10/5), this site passed the 50,000 visit mark, averaging about 750 visits a day. I know that's really still very much in small fry territory compared to the biggies, but it's gratifying nonetheless.