Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sen Grassley's Letter to FCC About Concerns About Mark Lloyd [Fairness Doctrine]
grassley.senate.gov ^ | 09/07/09 | Sen Grassley

Posted on 09/07/2009 11:14:10 AM PDT by BunnySlippers

PDF so I can't cut/paste. Grassley letter to Chairman of FCC about problems with Mark Lloyd.

Now's the time to take out another czar.

http://grassley.senate.gov/upload/Letter-to-FCC-Chairman.pdf


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; US: Iowa
KEYWORDS: 111th; bhofcc; fairnessdoctrine; grassley; letters; liberalmedia; marklloyd; talkradio

1 posted on 09/07/2009 11:14:11 AM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

This guy was my nominee for next, all along. In fact, he has the capacity to do much more damage than Van Jones did.


2 posted on 09/07/2009 11:17:11 AM PDT by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Totally agreed. Rumor is that he’s going to be hard to take out.


3 posted on 09/07/2009 11:18:39 AM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

Grassley is an inside the beltway guy who’s up for re-election next year.

The least he could do is write a letter.

Meanwhile, he’s been playing footsie on “health care” with Obama.

We need a real conservative to replace him next year.

One who wants to spend a lot less than the over 3 trillion a year like Grassley and other Republicans do.


4 posted on 09/07/2009 11:23:19 AM PDT by Nextrush (Sarah Palin is the new Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia

Agreed!! Mark Lloyd needs to be the next “czar” to go. His disbelief in the First Amendment is too dangerous.


5 posted on 09/07/2009 11:25:46 AM PDT by VRWCRick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
Another view of Lloyd (not to be missed)

Here is Lloyd commenting on the idea of freedom of speech in general:

“It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press,” he said. “This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies.”

Mr. Lloyd was not vetted by the congress either, just by Ms. Jarrett....Obama's real vice president?

6 posted on 09/07/2009 11:31:20 AM PDT by yoe (Obama, America's first Communist Czar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers; All
Yes, this is the next Czar we need to expose. The Obama Administration hates talk radio. They aim to kill it. The fairness doctrine is too obvious. So they are looking for back door methods. Lloyd is a hired gun for one purpose only and that's to destroy conservative talk radio. The fact that Air America failed miserably doesn't faze Lloyd at all. The fact that liberal talk radio shows have been tried time and time again doesn't faze him. He could care less. He wants to silence the opposition.

No Lloyd is just another Affirmative Action thug. He's going to be tougher to bring down then Van Jones who simply self destructed (although earlier).

We also need to focus on these Czars. These guys and gals answer to no one. This is a very scary proposition.
7 posted on 09/07/2009 11:32:28 AM PDT by truthguy (Good intentions are not enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers; Grampa Dave; Liz
Ya know... I appreciate what Sen. Grassley has done only recently on Obamacare and this singular act of sending a letter, but he represent IA. IA has launched two presidential candidates on all of us that we could all have certainly done without! Jimmah and Barack!

Their nonsensical early primary is so shallow and juvenile that the MSM just loves to use it to help lauch these type embarrassed and thus embarrassing Americans toward becoming POTUS and I've had enough!!!

Sen. Grassley... please fix you own states liberal launching pad on America!!!

8 posted on 09/07/2009 11:35:28 AM PDT by SierraWasp (Obama Targets Medicare Advantage Plans (Seniors Are Getting Screwed!!!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
Chuck’s letter is dated 14 August and requested a prompt reply. I guess Chuck's in the wrong party to deserve any respect from the "I Won" administration.
9 posted on 09/07/2009 11:36:55 AM PDT by shove_it (and have a nice day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

1-2-ping-a-roo for the hub.


10 posted on 09/07/2009 11:37:40 AM PDT by secret garden (Dubiety reigns here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe; All
“It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press,” he said. “This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies.”

Once you decipher this sentence you will realize just what a dangerous man this Mark Lloyd is. I hate it when people speak the way Lloyd has in this phrase. It's not just abuse of the English Language but it's painful to even read. Lloyd is a thug, plain and simple. He's a dangerous man. He MUST go!
11 posted on 09/07/2009 11:40:58 AM PDT by truthguy (Good intentions are not enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: truthguy

You are correct in your opinion. I just said that I have a feeling there are forces at work in this country to Overthrow the nation but are using other words for this treasonous act. Mr. Lloyd is among those who dislike America, so many of Obama’s friends fall into that category not the least is Valerie Jarrett Obama’s main advisor I am told.


12 posted on 09/07/2009 11:47:19 AM PDT by yoe (Obama, America's first Communist Czar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: truthguy

I have been researching for the past week on Mark Lloyd.
Trying to find the origin of his radical roots as well.
The earliest information I have on his bio is that he graduated from University of Mich. in 1978.

Found scads of bios on him, but no info. on his birth or youth. Many of his quotes make me question his place of birth. There is no question that he has a very strong interest, and dare I say it affinity, for certain SA countries. He also quoted Alinsky’s community organizing tactics several times in his book. Chicago is a possibility.

Does anyone know where this “cat” comes from?


13 posted on 09/07/2009 12:04:32 PM PDT by GOPeach (After 160 years under Democrat occupation, Georgia has awakened.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
Dear Chairman Gcnachowski,

On July 29, 2009, you announced the appointment of Mark Lloyd as Associate General Counsel and Chief Diversity Officer for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). I write today to express my conccrns with this appointment and ask for you to clarify and reaffirm statements you made to me in a personal meeting prior to your confirmation related to the Fairness Doctrine and efforts to diversify broadcast media.

On April 22,2009, before your confirmation by the U.S. Senate for your position as Chairman of the FCC, you came to my office and told me that you did not support an effort to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine. I took you at your word that, if confirmed, the policies that you promoted at the FCC would not include any policy or regulatory shifts that seek to reintroduce the long abandoned Fairness Doctrine. However, I have serious reservations that you may be moving away from these statements you made to me regarding the Fairness Doctrine given the appointment of Mr. Lloyd to a position within the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) at the FCC. Please allow me to elaborate.

My concerns relate to Mr. Lloyd's participation in scholarly writings on political talk radio, the Fairness Doctrine, and efforts to bring greater diversity to talk radio. Prior to joining the FCC, Mr. Lloyd served as a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress (CAP), in addition to positions as a professor at the Georgetown Public Policy Institute. In his capacity as a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, he coauthored a paper titled, "The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio." This paper argued that radio programming was currently "imbalanced" and that there are "serious questions about whether the companies licensed to broadcast over the public airwaves are serving the listening needs of all Americans." Mr. Lloyd's paper suggests three options to remedy the "imbalance" in political talk radio, including (l) restoring caps on commercial radio station ownership, (2) ensure greater accountability in licensing, and (3) require owners who fail to enforce public interest ownership obligations to pay a fee. While these remedies seem innocuous on their face, hidden within the paper are some stark revelations.

First, Mr. Lloyd's paper suggests that the Fairness Doctrinc was "never formally repealed." Instead, Mr. Lloyd argues that the FCC merely announced "it would no longer enforce certain regulations under the umbrella ofthe Fairness Doctrine." The paper continues by stating that while the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the FCC decision, the Supreme Court has "never overruled the cases that authorized the FCC's enforcement of the Fairness Doctrine ...thus it technically would not be considered repealed."

Second, the paper suggests that the FCC revise the licensing process for radio broadcasters. Specifically, it suggests that licenses should not be permitted for longer than three years, that they be subject to challenges in the decision to renew their licenses, and that they submit to strict documentation and regulatory requirements.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the paper suggests that commercial radio owners be subjected to new regulatory requirements enforcing public interest obligations and if they fail to meet these standards, subjecting them to fees and taxes in order to compel compliance. The paper suggests that such a fee or fine structure could raise between $100 million to $250 million in new revenue, but would not "overly burden commercial radio broadcasters."

Taken together, these statements represent a view that the FCC needs to expand its regulatory ann further into the commercial radio market. However, it would be unfair for me to say that Mr. Lloyd has specifically advocated for a return to the Fairness Doctrine. Instead, he has argued that the Fairness Doctrine is unnecessary if other regulatory reforms to commercial radio are implemented. Specifically, in discussing the CAP paper "The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio/' Mr. Lloyd authored an internet article published on CAP's website entitled, "Forget the Fairness Doctrine." In that piece, Mr. Lloyd stated, "we call for ownership rules that we think will create greater local diversity ...we call for more localism by putting teeth into the licensing rules. But we do not call for a return to the Fairness Doctrine."

Simply put, I strongly disagree with Mr. Lloyd. I do not believe that more regulation, more taxes or fines, or incrcased government intervention in the commercial radio markct will serve the public interest or further the goals of diversifying the marketplace. I am concerned that despite his statements that the Fairness Doctrine is unnecessary, Mr. Lloyd supports a backdoor method of furthering the goals of the Fairness Doctrine by other means. Accordingly, I ask that you clarify and reaffirm your commitment to me to oppose any reincarnation of the Fairness Doctrine. Further, I ask you to affirmatively state that you will not pursue an agenda that includes any new restrictions, fines, fees, or licensing requirements on commercial radio that would effectively create a backdoor Fairness Doctrine. I appreciate your prompt reply regarding this important matter.

Sincerely,

Chuck Grassley

United States Senator

14 posted on 09/07/2009 12:06:58 PM PDT by Nick Danger (Free cheese is found only in mousetraps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nick Danger

[I appreciate your prompt reply]

...and how is that workin’ out for ya’ Chuck?


15 posted on 09/07/2009 12:55:26 PM PDT by RetSignman (Townhalls ..."We have seen the Patriots and they are us")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
I think you are correct. Van Jones self destructed in a weird type of way. The videos of what he said in the past came back to haunt him. Once it was obvious that he was not operating with a full deck, it was time to go so Obama threw him under the bus.

With Lloyd it's going to be a little tougher. The issues are more complicated and the public will have a much more difficult time understanding the issues involved with how he plans to destroy conservative talk radio. But it can be done. If we can't force his resignation like Jones, we can make him ineffective. He just might quit when he can't get his way.
16 posted on 09/07/2009 12:59:23 PM PDT by truthguy (Good intentions are not enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
Here is the complete text of the 1 st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.",/B>

As hard as I read it and reread it I just can't seem to come up with reference to any "Fairness Doctrine".

17 posted on 09/07/2009 1:09:41 PM PDT by jws3sticks (Sarah Palin forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jws3sticks

Lets see a “Cyber Attack” and Obummer pulls the switch, Under the cover of darkness the FCC puts in the Local Diversity Doctrine, It might work.


18 posted on 09/07/2009 1:45:03 PM PDT by Foolsgold ("We live in the greatest country in the world and I am going to change it" Barry O'boomarang 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

I give the Senator credit for writing this letter.....


19 posted on 09/07/2009 2:32:56 PM PDT by The Wizard (Democrat Party: a criminal enterprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

Bunny,

Thanks for posting this. Are you able to find a reply from Genachowski on Grassley’s site? How were you able to find this link to Grassley’s letter?


20 posted on 09/07/2009 3:05:53 PM PDT by c-five
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

You think the Outcry is Bad On Health Care ? Wait until they try to Take Talk Radio off the Air and Then the Internet you wont be able to Get into Washington,The Roads will be Gridlocked with Protesters


21 posted on 09/07/2009 3:08:34 PM PDT by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ballplayer

I agree. I just hope we can do it with Cap n Tax. That one is really dangerous IMO.


22 posted on 09/07/2009 5:25:00 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

This is nice, but Grassley needs to submit a bill that would defund special advisors who were not approved by the Senate - this end-run nonsense has got to stop.


23 posted on 09/07/2009 6:23:52 PM PDT by bt_dooftlook (John Adams: Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush
We need a real conservative to replace him next year.

Great!! Why don't you do it since you're perfect.

The truth is Grassley is doing a great job and getting stabbed in the back for what he's doing.

Even Congressman Steve King has told constituents here in Iowa that if it weren't for Grassley, we'd already have Obamacare and we'd be stuck with it. Thank you, Senator Grassley. It is not possible for Iowa to replace him with someone more conservative.

24 posted on 09/08/2009 1:41:33 PM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma (Al Franken--the face of the third-party voters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp

Those wackos are RATS, not Republicans.


25 posted on 09/08/2009 1:43:22 PM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma (Al Franken--the face of the third-party voters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Conservativegreatgrandma

Sorry. Business as usual doesn’t cut it anymore and I’m convinced the GOP is socialist tax and spend lite.

Why do Congressional Republicans propose a 3.1 trillion dollar budget to match the Democrats 3.5 trillion dollar one?

Both have trillion dollar plus defecits.

That’s unacceptable.

New faces and outsiders. Its as simple as that.


26 posted on 09/08/2009 2:42:19 PM PDT by Nextrush (Sarah Palin is the new Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp
[Iowa's] nonsensical early primary is so shallow and juvenile

It's a caucus, not a primary. Each party adopts its own caucus rules and they differ greatly.

Sen. Grassley... please fix you own states liberal launching pad on America!!!

Especially now that they got what they wanted, Iowa's Dems probably couldn't care less about what Chuckles or you or I think about how they run their caucus.

27 posted on 09/08/2009 3:39:29 PM PDT by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush

So is there ANY Republican you would keep?


28 posted on 09/08/2009 4:02:58 PM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma (Al Franken--the face of the third-party voters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer; Conservativegreatgrandma; Grampa Dave
Caucus, or Primary, it doesn't matter! It's just something so early in the campaigns that gives the MSM something to screw around with and launch left wingers on all of us no matter what party.

It triggers a "horserace" of momentum in the media's desired direction way early and sets everything else way back!!! It's bogus!!! New Hampshire was bad enough without IA, too!!!

Reagan survived it by yelling about having PAID for his microphone at some televised event, remember?

29 posted on 09/08/2009 7:29:22 PM PDT by SierraWasp (Obama Targets Medicare Advantage Plans (Seniors Are Getting Screwed!!!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
Here's a link to the Grassley letter!
30 posted on 09/08/2009 10:24:46 PM PDT by TPartyType (912dc yeeeeehaaaaaw!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthguy
It may be a little tougher to get rid of Lloyd, but not much [click here and read on . . .]
31 posted on 09/08/2009 10:38:12 PM PDT by TPartyType (912dc yeeeeehaaaaaw!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Conservativegreatgrandma

That’s a good question.

Right now I would think Tom Coburn and Jim DeMint would be worth keeping in the Senate.

Michelle Bachmann definitely in the House.

There are more but not too many right now.


32 posted on 09/08/2009 10:59:11 PM PDT by Nextrush (Sarah Palin is the new Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush

So you just want to surrender to the RATS and walk away?


33 posted on 09/09/2009 4:12:39 AM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma (Al Franken--the face of the third-party voters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Conservativegreatgrandma

Political parties put up fronts and arguments and that includes the GOP.

I think it is time to realize that the GOP is socialism lite and it talks a line to get votes, then fails to deliver.

Its time for government to get smaller. I will vote for a person who really believes in it, not those who talk about it and then vote to create new programs like Medicare Part D (thank you George W. Bush) and lets not forget the bailout plan of 2008.

There will be pain in not voting GOP but fear is certainly not a good reason to vote for anything. Taking a stand and demanding an end to business as usual matters most to me right now.

I’m not prostituting myself to people who prove by their actions that they don’t really believe the way I do.


34 posted on 09/09/2009 10:36:02 AM PDT by Nextrush (Sarah Palin is the new Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp; Conservativegreatgrandma
Caucus, or Primary, it doesn't matter! It's just something so early in the campaigns that gives the MSM something to screw around with and launch left wingers on all of us no matter what party. It triggers a "horserace" of momentum in the media's desired direction way early and sets everything else way back!!! It's bogus!!!

Nice rant but, with all due respect, you don't know what you're talking about. It's not perfect but, when it comes to vetting and choosing a candidate, a caucus is a hell of a lot better than a primary, no question.

35 posted on 09/09/2009 1:01:28 PM PDT by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

Hay! It’s good to see yer back on here, BS’n everybody!!!


36 posted on 09/09/2009 5:18:37 PM PDT by SierraWasp (Obama Targets Medicare Advantage Plans (Seniors Are Getting Screwed!!!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp

Okay, apparently I gave you way more respect than you were actually due. My bad.


37 posted on 09/10/2009 9:37:44 AM PDT by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

Well, I’m sorry but the last time I remember seeing you post stuff you were touting windmills and other such “alternative energy” nonsense, so I figured here it comes again!!! It’s just my way of opting out...


38 posted on 09/10/2009 11:45:13 AM PDT by SierraWasp (Obama Targets Medicare Advantage Plans (Seniors Are Getting Screwed!!!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp
It’s just my way of opting out...

Good for you. Speaking of "nonsense," when you don't know sh*t about the subject, you might consider skipping the opting-in altogether, saving your rants and exclamation points for that which you know something about.

39 posted on 09/10/2009 2:36:21 PM PDT by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson