I 
108TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. R. 3914
To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to require that violent video 
programming is limited to broadcast after the hours when children are 
reasonably likely to comprise a substantial portion of the audience, unless 
it is specifically rated on the basis of its violent content so that it 
is blockable by electronic means specifically on the basis of that content. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MARCH 9, 2004
Mr. BACA (for himself, Mr. OSBORNE, and Mr. PRICE of North Carolina) in-
troduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on En-
ergy and Commerce 
A BILL 
To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to require that 
violent video programming is limited to broadcast after 
the hours when children are reasonably likely to comprise 
a substantial portion of the audience, unless it is specifi-
cally rated on the basis of its violent content so that 
it is blockable by electronic means specifically on the 
basis of that content.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Children’s Protection 
from Violent Programming Act’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
The Congress makes the following findings: 
(1) Television influences children’s perception 
of the values and behavior that are common and ac-
ceptable in society. 
(2) Broadcast television, cable television, and 
video programming are—
(A) uniquely pervasive presences in the 
lives of all American children; and 
(B) readily accessible to all American chil-
dren. 
(3) Violent video programming influences chil-
dren, as does indecent programming. 
(4) There is empirical evidence that children ex-
posed to violent video programming at a young age 
have a higher tendency to engage in violent and ag-
gressive behavior later in life than those children not 
so exposed. 
(5) There is empirical evidence that children ex-
posed to violent video programming have a greater 
tendency to assume that acts of violence are accept-
able behavior and therefore to imitate such behavior.
(6) There is empirical evidence that children ex-
posed to violent video programming have an in-
creased fear of becoming a victim of violence, result-
ing in increased self-protective behaviors and in-
creased mistrust of others. 
(7) There is a compelling governmental interest 
in limiting the negative influences of violent video 
programming on children. 
(8) There is a compelling governmental interest 
in channeling programming with violent content to 
periods of the day when children are not likely to 
comprise a substantial portion of the television audi-
ence. 
(9) A significant amount of violent program-
ming that is readily accessible to minors remains 
unrated specifically for violence and therefore cannot 
be blocked solely on the basis of its violent content. 
(10) Age-based ratings that do not include con-
tent rating for violence do not allow parents to block 
programming based solely on violent content thereby 
rendering ineffective any technology-based blocking 
mechanism designed to limit violent video program-
ming. 
(11) The most recent study of the television 
ratings system by the Kaiser Family Foundation
concludes that 79 percent of violent programming is 
not specifically rated for violence. 
(12) Technology-based solutions, such as the V-
chip, may be helpful in protecting some children, but 
cannot achieve the compelling governmental interest 
in protecting all children from violent programming 
when parents are only able to block programming 
that has, in fact, been rated for violence. 
(13) Restricting the hours when violent pro-
gramming can be shown protects the interests of 
children whose parents are unavailable, unable to su-
pervise their children’s viewing behavior, do not have 
the benefit of technology-based solutions, are unable 
to afford the costs of technology-based solutions, or 
are unable to determine the content of those shows 
that are only subject to age-based ratings. 
(14) After further study, pursuant to a rule-
making, the Federal Communications Commission 
may conclude that content-based ratings and block-
ing technology do not effectively protect children 
from the harm of violent video programming. 
(15) If the Federal Communications Commis-
sion reaches the conclusion described in paragraph 
(14), the channeling of violent video programming 
will be the least restrictive means of limiting the ex-
posure of children to the harmful influences of vio-
lent video programming. 
SEC. 3. ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTIVENESS OF CURRENT 
RATING SYSTEM FOR VIOLENCE AND EFFEC-
TIVENESS OF V-CHIP IN BLOCKING VIOLENT 
PROGRAMMING. 
(a) REPORT.—The Federal Communications Com-
mission shall—
(1) assess the effectiveness of measures to re-
quire television broadcasters and multichannel video 
programming distributors (as defined in section 
602(13) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
U.S.C. 522(13)) to rate and encode programming 
that could be blocked by parents using the V-chip 
undertaken under section 715 of the Communica-
tions Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 715) and under sub-
sections (w) and (x) of section 303 of that Act (47 
U.S.C. 303(w) and (x)) in accomplishing the pur-
poses for which they were enacted; and 
(2) report its findings to the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
United States Senate and the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce of the United States House of Rep-
resentatives, within 12 months after the date of en-
actment of this Act, and annually thereafter.
(b) ACTION.—If the Commission finds at any time, 
as a result of its ongoing assessment under subsection (a), 
that the measures referred to in subsection (a)(1) are in-
sufficiently effective, then the Commission shall complete 
a rulemaking within 270 days after the date on which the 
Commission makes that finding to prohibit the distribu-
tion of violent video programming during the hours when 
children are reasonably likely to comprise a substantial 
portion of the audience. 
(c) DEFINITIONS.—Any term used in this section 
that is defined in section 715 of the Communications Act 
of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 715), or in regulations under that sec-
tion, has the same meaning as when used in that section 
or in those regulations. 
SEC. 4. UNLAWFUL DISTRIBUTION OF VIOLENT VIDEO PRO-
GRAMMING 
THAT 
IS 
NOT 
SPECIFICALLY 
RATED FOR VIOLENCE AND THEREFORE IS 
NOT BLOCKABLE. 
Title VII of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
U.S.C. 701 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
following: