Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) thinks so.

When it was law it did a couple of things: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows or editorials.

Should this really be the government’s role?  Is ensuring “balance” in political speech the same as restricting pornography?  I don’t think so.  Right now it only applies to radio (which conservatives tend to dominate), but doesn’t apply anywhere else.  Not to say that it couldn’t eventually be extended to cable and the internet.  Slippery slope.  Schumer interview below:

HT: Hot Air

You May Also Like

The American Model of Economics: Follow Harding and Coolidge’s Example

John Hendrickson: President Donald Trump can look to Presidents Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge’s example of following an American model of economics.

About Ranked Choice Voting

Shane Vander Hart: Ranked choice voting can help dismantle a two-party system, but it is not necessary for a candidate to win by a majority vote.

White House Can’t Confirm Those Who Sign Up for Obamacare on Dec. 23 Will Have It on Jan. 1

  ABC News’ Jon Karl: (Will people who buy insurance) by December…

Chuck Grassley Criticizes “Gang of Six” Amnesty Proposal

U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on the floor of the U.S. Senate criticized the “gang of six” amnesty proposal that six U.S. Senators are threatening to shut down the government over if the U.S. Senate does not vote on their proposal.