Hubris?

What are the Republicans smoking these days?

Now we have Rep. James Sensenbrenner III (WI) suggesting that broadcasters who are accused of violating FCC decency regulations be tried as criminals.

Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner III, R-Wis., told cable industry executives attending the National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. conference here on Monday that criminal prosecution would be a more efficient way to enforce the indecency regulations.

“I’d prefer using the criminal process rather than the regulatory process,” Sensenbrenner told the executives.

Hey guy, aren’t you taking that so-called Republican mandate thing a little too far? Even people who don’t subscribe to and have no plans on subscribing to the triple X channels--or even HBO--think it’s stupid and dangerous to criminalize displays of compartmentalized forms of indecency. It isn’t as though broadcasters are planning to flash breasts from the humongous public TV screens.

“People who are in flagrant disregard should face a criminal process rather than a regulator [sic] process,” Sensenbrenner said. “That is the way to go. Aim the cannon specifically at the people committing the offenses, rather than the blunderbuss approach that gets the good actors.

When a specific violator of an FCC decency standard is fined, how are “good actors” affected by that fine?

Yes, broadcast channels should be regulated for decency and violators should pay in some manner—up to having the license suspended/revoked even--but criminalizing offenses that do not deprive individuals or groups of life, limb, liberty and/or property is a place where we do not want to go..

And before someone comments that Rep. Sensenbrenner is only target broadcast stations, look who else was in attendance.

Although cable and satellite TV are not covered by the indecency statutes, Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, and Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, have said they want to bring multichannel programmers into the legal mix.

Stevens attended the convention Sunday, when he met with top cable industry executives, sources said. The executives hoped to persuade Stevens to back off, the sources said.

Senator Stevens has been talking up fining cable and satellite companies for indecency for a few months now.

In this country, adults should have the freedom to pollute their minds in their own homes and whoever may want to sell them that pollution should not have to suffer monetarily for it, much less be criminalized. I may think that this sort of thing is distasteful and even sinful, but guess what? As long as no children are seeing graphic programs and as long as the programs are not up for free public consumption, it’s not my business, nor is it that of the government.

I don’t have Republican congressional representatives, but many of you do. Write to them and tell them to ease up on this sort of thing.

Didn’t congress waste enough time and money on the steroid hearings?

(Thanks to Jeff Goldstein)

UPDATE: Joel of No Pundit Intended says that Rep. Sensenbrenner's intent is to criminalize *individual* offenders rather than broadcast/cable/satellite licensees. If true, I'd call that almost worse. Can you see individuals earning a criminal record for purposefully dropping the F-bomb on TV, as Shaquille O'Neal infamously did in an impromtu interview last season?

Some observers, even Republicans, lamented that it was dangerous for one party to hold the executive branch and both houses of congress. This kind of thing demonstrates why.

Comments

[Joel (No Pundit Intended)]

I might be way off, but I read that to mean:

Janet Jackson goes to jail rather than fining CBS $Upteen Jillion.

[baldilocks]

You could be right. Will update.

[Steve]

I understood when people complained about the Janet Jackson episode. I don't expect anything like that will happen again. I am not looking to have a lot of law made just on account of things like that. But all the same, HBO has gone psycho after hours. I am not talking about a little soft stuff here and there. They really just show the most psycho movies night-in and night-out. It is a little creepy. I am old enough to remember when HBO wasn't like that and it makes me wonder what happened to them and why? Also, psychotic thrillers are being made around the year when they used to be mainly confined to around Halloween time. They seemed to be in a mode where they must continue to top and top and top previous movies made. It is a little disturbing as a subject for reflection. Where will all this go if it continues?

[baldilocks]

Steve: that's why I don't and won't *pay* for HBO. Everyone has that same choice.

[Steve]

I know what you're saying. My HBO comes with the rent. I know I could still have it turned off. I don't watch but I get home late and I keep hoping it is just a phase HBO is going through. But no its gone bye bye. I don't even bother to check anymore. I'm not looking for laws either but I am curious to hear anyone's ideas that reflect upon it all. Wouldn't it be a little strange if no one ever tried something.

[wayne]

I hope that all of you realize that this is not really about JJ's udders. There are already planty of laws to handle that and we the people can always boycott the networks.

What the focus and intention of all of this censorship crap is really about is political speech. It is the same thing that they stuffed down our throats with McCain-Feingold. If we really want to give a name to this bill we have to honestly call it the "Talk nice about your leaders or we will put you in jail" bill.

Think the Swiftvets would have gotten a shot at putting out the truth about Hanoi John if this set of laws gets passed? I think not.

[Steve]

Sorry. I am into certain issues that I stay current on. These kinds of things I don't. We've all got to pick and choose in this big world. I really wasn't familiar with this specific legislation.