I 
108TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. R. 4710 
To clarify the congressional intent concerning, and to codify, certain require-
ments of the Communications Act of 1934 that ensure that broadcasters 
afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on 
issues of public importance. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JUNE 24, 2004 
Ms. SLAUGHTER (for herself, Mr. HINCHEY, and Mr. GRIJALVA) introduced 
the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce 
A BILL 
To clarify the congressional intent concerning, and to codify, 
certain requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 
that ensure that broadcasters afford reasonable oppor-
tunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues 
of public importance. 
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 ‘‘Meaningful Expression 
of Democracy in America Act’’ or the ‘‘MEDIA Act’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
The Congress finds the following:
(1) A broadcast license confers the right to use 
a valuable public resource, and a broadcaster is 
therefore required to utilize that resource as a trust-
ee for the American people. 
(2) There is a substantial governmental interest 
in conditioning the award or renewal of a broadcast 
license on the requirement that the licensee ensure 
the widest possible dissemination of information 
from diverse and antagonistic sources by presenting 
a reasonable opportunity for the discussion of con-
flicting views on issues of public importance. 
(3) Since the removal of the Fairness Doctrine 
standard in 1987, we have seen a polarization in 
America due to the dissemination of false and mis-
leading information and the growing proliferation of 
highly partisan news outlets. 
(4) Democracy is built on the idea that the 
views, beliefs, and values of an informed citizenry 
are the best basis for political decision-making. 
(5) As journalist Bill Moyers said, ‘‘A free and 
responsible government by popular consent just can’t 
exist without an informed public.
.
. If free and 
independent journalism committed to telling the 
truth without fear or favor is suffocated, the oxygen 
goes out of democracy.’’
(6) To restore the oxygen, there is broad public 
support for reestablishing requirements for balance 
in issue presentation over the public airwaves. 
(7) The Fairness Doctrine— 
(A) fairly reflects the statutory obligation 
of broadcasters under that Act to operate in the 
public interest; and 
(B) strikes a reasonable balance among the 
First Amendment rights of the public and 
broadcast licensees. 
(8) Our Founding Fathers created this democ-
racy based on the right to debate ideas openly and 
make informed choices, and the lack of a balanced 
debate on issues of public importance threatens 
these ideals. 
SEC. 3. AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 
1934. 
Section 315 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
U.S.C. 315) is amended— 
(1) by redesignating subsections (a) through (e) 
as subsections (b) through (f), respectively; and 
(2) by inserting before subsection (b) (as so re-
designated) the following new subsection: 
‘‘(a) PUBLIC INTEREST OBLIGATION TO COVER PUB-
LICLY IMPORTANT ISSUES.—A broadcast licensee shall af-
ford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of con-
flicting views on issues of public importance. The enforce-
ment and application of the requirement imposed by this 
subsection shall be consistent with the rules and policies 
of the Commission in effect on January 1, 1987.’’. 
SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. 
This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall 
take effect upon the date of enactment of this Act. 
Æ