Other Heritage Sites | Bookstore | About Us | Contact Us 


Heritage home Issues Experts Press and Media Support Heritage

Blogs > Linked! > Author > Nancy Marano

June 29, 2006

As FCC Digs Into Ownership, Big Media No Longer Cares

Last week, the Federal Communications Commission voted to re-tackle the sticky issue of media ownership. This time, the agency plans to loosen some rules, allowing big media companies to expand. For instance, a newspaper will -- for the first time since 1975 -- probably be allowed to buy the most popular television station in the same city.

But the times, technology and media marketplace have changed so much since the FCC began its ownership review last time, in 2002, that some of the same media giants that lobbied for changes before -- such as Tribune Co. -- may take little advantage of changes this time.

[Link]

'Net Neutrality' Amendment Rejected

A proposal to prevent Internet service providers from charging Web firms more for faster service to consumers failed yesterday to clear a Senate committee.

[Link]

Corrupt Campaign 'Reform'

George F. Will addresses the recent Supreme Court Decision on Campaign Finance.

Campaign finance reform is what it pretends to combat: corruption. The Supreme Court should have said something like that when it struck down, as unconstitutional abridgments of free speech, Vermont's severe limits on contributions to and spending by campaigns.

[Link]

June 20, 2006

Justices Rein In Clean Water Act

The Supreme Court handed down a decision in the Rapanos case yesterday, opining that new limits could be imposed on the Clean Water Act. However, the 5-4 decision failed to define what those new limits might be.

In yesterday's ruling, a five-justice majority agreed that the Army Corps of Engineers, the lead federal agency on wetlands regulation, exceeded its authority when it denied two Michigan developers permits to build on wetlands. The court said the Corps had gone beyond the Clean Water Act by making landowners obtain permits to dump rocks and dirt not only in marshes directly next to lakes and rivers but also in areas linked to larger bodies of water only through a network of ditches and drains.

But there was no clear majority as to where the Corps should have drawn the line, with a four-justice plurality made up of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. arguing for an across-the-board reduction in the Corps' regulatory role but Kennedy rejecting that view and calling for a case-by-case approach.

[Link]

June 14, 2006

WSJ.com - Not So Neutral

An article in the Wall Street Journal describes the current debate over Net Neutrality. (Subscription Required)

People on both sides of the issue -- but mostly those who favor Net neutrality, or treating all Internet traffic the same -- have turned to the Web to get out their messages in a complicated debate before Congress now. More than a dozen online videos sound off on whether Congress should let cable and phone companies create a two-tiered Internet that could end up with content providers, such as Google Inc., paying to ensure speedier delivery of their services.

[Link]

June 13, 2006

David (Car) Has Better Chance Against Goliath (S.U.V.) - New York Times

It seems that the automobile industry is regulating itself to take on the problems CAFE regulations caused with regard to vehicle downsizing.

As more Americans buy smaller cars to save money on gas, the danger of collisions between mismatched vehicles is escalating.

[Link]

June 1, 2006

Greening of the Treasury? - WSJ

An article in today's Wall Street Journal (subscription required) ponders whether Treasury secretary nominee Henry Paulson's environmental (read: "green") standpoint will make a difference at Treasury.

We probably won't know about Mr. Paulson's offense until after the November congressional elections. But given his record in using Goldman's power and money toward environmental ends, he just might use his clout to push the administration toward dealing with climate change or even -- don't mention it before the elections -- considering an energy tax.

Christie Whitman, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency early in the Bush years, says just having a sympathetic voice at Treasury can be a big deal. "One of the biggest raps against some environmental proposals is that they're not economically sound," she says. "One of the things that his kind of advocacy can do is put a lie to that."

[Link]

May 25, 2006

House scales back Bush nuclear power bid - Yahoo! News

A broad spending bill, passed 404-20 and sent to the Senate, cuts Bush's request for the first installment of the nuclear initiative in half, to about $130 million. An attempt to slash it by an additional $40 million was rejected.

[Link]

Page: 1

Search


This page: xml     All: xml [?]

Creative Commons License

This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Disclaimer: A link is a link, not an endorsement. Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress.

Powered by Furl
  RSS Feeds | Careers | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Copyright
 ©2006 The Heritage Foundation
General Inquiries: 202.546.4400 
Media Relations: 202.675.1761