The Monmouth inquirer., 1926-12-23

Oh OOLuIuGICG
I have every sympathy FOR cur leg
isIators In Washington, who for the
past four years have endeavored to
cope with the very serious task OF
framing a bill for the governmental
regulation and control of communities
ton by radio. The task is heavy with
many problems-with scientific prob
lens yet unso1ved in the mind of the
scientist, with technical problems still
in the laboratory stage, with indus
trial problems yet unstabilized, with
public problems of the utmost impor-
lance.
The axiom that the best governed
nation is the least governed nation
applies with particular force to legis-
lation for the radio art and the rsdio
industry. Radio is a swiftly moving
art and its problems today may not be
its problems tomorrow. The fact Is
undeniable that the great progress
thus far made both in the art and in
the industry has taken place during
a period of minimum governmental
regulation or interference.
We need look back only few years
to realize what unwise legislation
might have meant both to the radio
industry and to the great radio listen
ing public of the United States.
@controI of Air" Not Possible
Two years ago the advocacy Of high
power broadcasting stations by the
Radio Corporation of America brought
a storm of protest from those who
feared that this threatened control
of the air." Legislation at that time,
definitely limiting the power Of broad
casting stations, would have robbed
millions of listeners in the United
States of the broadcasting service
which they now enjoy and which is
made available to them only through
that high power transmission now in
dorsed by public opinion. Unnumber-
ed thousands of homes, particularly
In the agricultural and more remote
sections of our country, would have
been cut OF from broadcasting ser
Vice that has no peer in any other
part OF the world; from the numerous
educational opportunities now open
through the air; from Informative and
market service 50 vital to the farmer,
and our millions of radio listeners
would have been deprived of the best
means yet developed for combating
and overcoming that well-known
nemesis of broadcasting static.
Superpower has meant even more
than this. 1t has given US greater ae-
surance in our ship-to-shore commu-
nications. 1t has enabled us to make
UNNECESSARILY better the services nee
essary to insure the safety of lives az
sea.
To permit radio legislation to be-
come the vehicle of politics IL Con-
gress Is to trife with a power and a
service not yet fully appreciated. To
make infiexible statutes for an srt
that is as flexible as the air, is to vio-
late the very laws of scientific and
technical development. 1t Is to work
a public injury, under the guise OF
governmental regulation.
Under the present development of
the art there are only SO bands Of
wavelengths available within the CON
nnes Of the United States, or approx
imately one-tenth the number of sta
tons now In operation or projected in
the immediate future. On the other
hand, there is a growing tendency on
the part of some established stations
as well as many new stations to arbi-
trarily and selfishly appropriate to
their own use any desired wavelength
regardless of its prior use to the salts
faction of the public. There can be
no reasonable objection to the proper
regulation of the ether, and one court
Of competent jurisdiction has already
spoken against wavelength piracy.
Virtually all other problems en-
braced in the proposed radio legisla-
ton are adequately covered by exist
ing laws.
The best possible way to discourage
the creation of a great and permanent
service of radio broadcasting in the
United States Is to limit every broad
casting station to mere twenty-four
months OF tenure in the air, regard
less of the character and policy OF
the station affected, regardless OF the
service which 1t renders to the nation
and tue public. regardless Of the cap