By Scott Tibbs, July 3, 2008
A year ago, the House of Representatives voted 309-115 to prevent the so-called "fairness doctrine" from being enforced for one year. One would think that, with that lopsided of a vote against the Fairness Doctrine, the Democrats would at least allow an up-or-down vote on H.R. 2905, the Broadcaster Freedom Act. You would be wrong. Congressman Mike Pence spoke on the floor of the House:
But following that vote, I introduced the Broadcaster Freedom Act which would permanently ban the "Fairness Doctrine" from ever coming back. And so far, not one single House Democrat has signed our petition for an up-or-down vote on broadcast freedom…and now we know why.
Asked yesterday if she supported reviving the ‘Fairness Doctrine,’ Speaker Nancy Pelosi replied "yes."
She told a meeting at the Christian Science Monitor that the Broadcaster Freedom Act would not receive a vote because "the interest of my caucus is the reverse."
Pence's fellow Hoosier, Baron Hill, was one of those 309 members of Congress who voted against the Fairness Doctrine a year ago. But with the election in full swing, we see the true colors of the Democrats running Congress. Why won't Baron Hill join Pence in his efforts to prevent the federal government from regulating the content of political speech on the nation's airwaves? Where is Baron?
The idea that we "need" the "Fairness Doctrine" to provide "balance" is laughable. The Internet, blogs, podcasts, cable TV news programs, newspapers, and public protests are just a few ways to provide "balance" to talk radio. But the push to revive the "Fairness Doctrine" has nothing to do with "fairness". Talk radio is a thorn in their side and has been for 20 years now. It is politically inconvenient for Democrats to have Rush Limbaugh and others criticizing them on a daily basis and mobilizing their audiences.
Democrats have bitterly complained about Republicans questioning their patriotism in the years since the September 11 terrorist attacks. It is perfectly reasonable to question the patriotism of Democrats when they refuse to support legislation that would prevent the government from infringing on the right to free speech, one of the foundational freedoms of the United States of America. What better way is there to provide aid and comfort to Islamic terrorists who hate freedom than for the federal government to restrict freedom?