I 
108TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 2052
To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to preserve localism, to foster 
and promote the diversity of television programming, to foster and pro-
mote competition, and to prevent excessive concentration of ownership 
of the nation’s television broadcast stations. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MAY 9, 2003
Mr. BURR (for himself, Mr. DINGELL, Mr. DEAL of Georgia, Mr. PRICE of 
North Carolina, and Mr. MARKEY) introduced the following bill; which 
was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
A BILL 
To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to preserve 
localism, to foster and promote the diversity of television 
programming, to foster and promote competition, and 
to prevent excessive concentration of ownership of the 
nation’s television broadcast stations.
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 ‘‘Preservation of Local-
ism, Program Diversity, and Competition in Television 
Broadcast Service Act of 2003’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSES. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following find-
ings: 
(1) The principle of localism is embedded in the 
Communications Act in section 307(b) of the Com-
munications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 307(b)). It has 
been the pole star for regulation of the broadcast in-
dustry by the Federal Communications Commission 
for nearly 70 years. 
(2) In the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 
Congress directed the Federal Communications 
Commission to increase the limitations on national 
multiple television ownership so that one party could 
not own or control television stations whose aggre-
gate national audience reach exceeded 35 percent. 
Congress did so because it recognized that—
(A) further national concentration could 
not be undone; 
(B) other regulatory changes, such as the 
repeal by the Commission of its financial and 
syndication regulations, would heighten the 
power of the national television networks; and 
(C) the independence of non-network-
owned stations would be threatened if network 
ownership exceeded 35 percent.
(3) If a limit to the national audience reach of 
television stations that one party may own or control 
is not codified at this time—
(A) further national concentration may 
occur whose pernicious effects may be difficult 
to eradicate; and 
(B) the independence of non-network-
owned stations will be threatened, placing local 
stations in danger of becoming mere passive 
conduits for network transmissions. 
(4) A cap on national multiple television owner-
ship will help preserve localism by limiting the net-
works ability to dictate programming aired on local 
stations. 
(5) The landscape of national ownership has 
changed dramatically over the past two decades 
since the time when the networks were limited to 
owning just seven television stations nationwide: 
(A) the Commission’s financial and syn-
dication regulations have been repealed; 
(B) the networks can own more than one 
television station in many local markets; 
(C) the networks have embraced program-
ming ventures from studios to syndication to 
foreign sales; and
(D) the networks own the most popular 
cable and Internet content businesses. 
Together these changes have strengthened the net-
works hands and given them strong incentives to 
override local interests. 
(6) Unlike non-network-owned stations which 
are only concerned with local viewers, network-owned 
stations have multiple interests they must consider: 
national advertising interests, syndicated program-
ming interests, foreign sales interests, cable pro-
gramming interests, and, lastly, local station inter-
ests. 
(7) The possibility of further nationalization 
threatens the current give-and-take between non-net-
work-owned affiliates and networks which can result 
in programming being edited, scheduled, or pro-
moted in ways that are more appropriate for local 
audiences. 
(8) As network power has grown in recent 
years, the networks have forced affiliation agree-
ments to tilt the balance of power even more in their 
favor. Contract provisions encroach on the ability of
non-network-owned affiliates to reject programming 
that local stations determine not to be in the best 
interests of their local communities, and local sta-
tions are penalized for unauthorized preemptions (as 
determined by the network) and for exceeding pre-
emption baskets. 
(9) This Act will help to preserve localism in 
and to prevent the further nationalization of the tel-
evision broadcast service. 
(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this Act are—
(1) to promote the values of localism in the tel-
evision broadcast service; 
(2) to promote diversity of television program-
ming and viewpoints; 
(3) to promote competition; and 
(4) to prevent excessive concentration of owner-
ship by establishing a limit to the national audience 
reach of the television stations that any one party 
may own or control. 
SEC. 3. NATIONAL TELEVISION MULTIPLE OWNERSHIP LIM-
ITATIONS. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT
OF
NATIONAL
TELEVISION 
MULTIPLE OWNERSHIP LIMITATIONS.—Part I of Title III 
of the Communications Act of 1934 is amended by insert-
ing after section 339 (47 U.S.C. 339) the following new 
section:
‘‘SEC. 340. NATIONAL TELEVISION MULTIPLE OWNERSHIP 
LIMITATIONS. 
‘‘(a) NATIONAL AUDIENCE REACH LIMITATION.—
The Commission shall not permit any license for a com-
mercial television broadcast station to be granted, trans-
ferred, or assigned to any party (including all parties 
under common control) if the grant, transfer, or assign-
ment of such license would result in such party or any 
of its stockholders, partners, or members, officers, or di-
rectors, directly or indirectly, owning, operating or control-
ling, or having a cognizable interest in television stations 
which have an aggregate national audience reach exceed-
ing 35 percent. 
‘‘(b) NO GRANDFATHERING.—The Commission shall 
require any party (including all parties under common 
control) that holds licenses for commercial television 
broadcast stations in excess of the limitation contained in 
subsection (a) to divest itself of such licenses as may be 
necessary to come into compliance with such limitation 
within one year after the date of enactment of this section. 
‘‘(c) SECTION NOT SUBJECT TO FORBEARANCE.—
Section 10 of this Act shall not apply to the requirements 
of this section. 
‘‘(d) DEFINITIONS.—
‘‘(1) NATIONAL AUDIENCE REACH.—The term 
‘national audience reach’ means—
‘‘(A) the total number of television house-
holds in the Nielsen Designated Market Area 
(DMA) markets in which the relevant stations 
are located, or as determined under a successor 
measure adopted by the Commission to delin-
eate television markets for purposes of this sec-
tion; divided by 
‘‘(B) the total national television house-
holds as measured by such DMA data (or such 
successor measure) at the time of a grant, 
transfer, or assignment of a license. 
No market shall be counted more than once in mak-
ing this calculation. 
‘‘(2) COGNIZABLE INTEREST.—Except as may 
otherwise be provided by regulation by the Commis-
sion, the term ‘cognizable interest’ means any part-
nership or direct ownership interest and any voting 
stock interest amounting to 5 percent or more of the 
outstanding voting stock of a licensee.’’. 
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 202(c)(1) 
of the Telecommunications Act of 1934 (Public Law 104–
104; 110 Stat. 111) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘its regulations’’ and all that 
follows through ‘‘by eliminating’’ and inserting ‘‘its 
regulations (47 CFR 73.3555) by eliminating’’;
(2) by striking ‘‘; and’’ at the end of subpara-
graph (A) and inserting a period; and 
(3) by striking subparagraph (B).
Æ