Advertisement

May 19, 2013

Sponsors of House FCC Reform Bill Pull in Big Money From Telecom and Broadcasters

Last week a bill to restructure the Federal Communications Commission's rulemaking process passed the House of Representatives, 247-174. The measure was supported by AT&T, the National Association of Broadcasters, the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, and Verizon Communications, all of which are major contributors to the bill's 10 sponsors.

H.R. 3309, sponsored by Greg Walden (R-Ore.) and nine other co-sponsors, would establish additional requirements for the FCC before the agency could issue new regulations. These would include identifying a specific market failure or harm that warrants new rules, holding a longer public comment period, and providing a cost-benefit analysis of all regulations applied. It would also limit the ability of the agency to include any terms on corporate mergers. Lawmakers supporting the bill say it would ensure the FCC's enactment of more appropriate rules, shorten its reaction time, and allow for more public input to the agency, while opponents say it is simply an attempt to hamstring the FCC and make it more difficult to fulfill its public interest function.

The FCC has authority to regulate many communications sectors, including telephone, cable television, broadband internet, broadcast radio and television, satellite television, and radio spectrum allocation. Eight of the bill's 10 sponsors have at least one, if not several, FCC-regulated companies among their top 10 contributing organizations. Comcast made the top 10 list of five sponsors, while the National Cable & Telecommunications Association made four top 10 lists. 

Senate Democrats have said that they will not pass the bill, and President Obama has indicated that he may veto the bill if it reaches his desk. Despite this, several industry groups have already praised the passage of the bill, with National Cable & Telecommunications Association president Michael Powell commending Walden for his attempt to reform the FCC.

Sponsors

MapLight has conducted an analysis of campaign contributions from FCC-regulated companies/industries which are among the top 10 contributing organizations to Greg Walden and the nine co-sponsors of H.R. 3309. All contribution figures are from July 1, 2009–June 30, 2011. Click here to download a spreadsheet of the contributions included in this report.

Submitted by Chris Gorin on Apr 5, 2012

METHODOLOGY: MapLight analysis of reported contributions to congressional campaigns of sponsors of H.R. 3309 as of April 4, 2012 and their top 10 contributing organizations from July 1, 2009–June 30, 2011. Campaign contributions data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org).

application/vnd.ms-excel iconDATA-172_FCC-Regulated-Companies_Current-US-House_20110630-20090701.xls

© Copyright 2013 MapLight

About the Author

MapLight is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, research organization that reveals money's influence on politics.

Elected officials collect large sums of money to run their campaigns, and they often pay back campaign contributors with special access and favorable laws. This common practice is contrary to the public interest, yet legal.

MapLight connects data on campaign contributions, politicians, votes, industries, companies, and more to show patterns of influence that could never be seen before. 

We currently research money and influence in the...

510-868-0894

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.