The “fairness doctrine,” a policy that until 1987 required broadcasters to give equal time to opposing viewpoints, has been getting attention lately as Republicans try to keep Democrats from reinstating the rule on the airwaves. Below is a clip of Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., debating Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., about that issue.
Coleman opposes revival of the fairness doctrine and noted that the talk of doing so is unwisely aimed at talk radio, which is dominated by conservatives. “I think it’s very dangerous for government to be in the position of deciding what’s fair and balanced,” he said, later adding that “there’s nothing fair about the fairness doctrine.”
The Senate this week passed a bill to allow more research using embryonic stem cells. President Bush vetoed a previous stem-cell bill and has vowed to do the same to the Democratic-backed version the Senate passed. Republicans offered an alternative that Bush said he would sign.
Here is an AP video report on Bush’s reaction to the Senate’s decision, followed by audio excerpts of the debate:
Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., called the GOP alternative “an effective way to provide for advancements in science and give hope to those who are waiting for cures without compromising the value of life.”
Norm Coleman, R-Minn.: “[T]he science is moving so much faster than the politics here. The science is putting us in a position where we can and should explore the benefits of embroynic research … without having to cross the moral line.”
Susan Collins, R-Maine: “It makes no sense to cut off a promising source of research that could benefit from federal funds. … There are no guarantees with any scientific research, but certainly the promise is there.”
Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., added his two cents to the debate about how to better care for military veterans once they return home. “[W]e need to support our troops once when come home just as much as we support them when they’re defending our nation and our freedom abroad,” he said. “We need to support our troops and their families before, during and after their deployments.”
Sen. Norm Coleman has focused his attention on security issues in the opening days of the 110th Congress. Recent podcast episodes have been dedicated to the Minnesota Republican’s:
Questions about the commission that investigated the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks;
Floor speech on the Iraq war;
And questions about Iraq to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice at a Senate hearing.
At the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing with Rice, meanwhile, Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., called the war in Iraq “a true nightmare for the United States.”
“It is time to redeploy our brave troops out of Iraq now,” Feingold said. He called for Congress to “use the power of the purse to bring our troops out of Iraq.”
The Senate today approved language to extend the term of the special inspector who has been overseeing reconstruction in Iraq. Stuart Bowen has held the job since October 2004 and would continue in the role at least through late 2008, if the legislation is enacted.
The extension was approved as an amendment to legislation that would authorize military construction projects in fiscal 2007. It would overturn language in the fiscal 2007 defense authorization bill that would have terminated the office by Oct. 1, 2007.
The extension encompasses language of a bill introduced by several senators to extend the office’s authorization until 10 months after 80 percent of the Iraq reconstruction money has been spent. “That will ensure continuing aggressive oversight of American tax dollars in Iraq,” said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, a co-sponsor of the bill.
Sens. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., and Russell Feingold, D-Wis., were among the other co-sponsors. They joined Collins in praising the Senate’s action.
Coleman: “The special inspector general was a good idea when it began. It was a mistake to terminate its authority. It needs to be continued. … Until taxpayer dollars are finished being spent in Iraq, we need oversight.”
Collins: “The IG’s office has exposed numerous cases of waste, fraud and abuse. It’s work has led directly to convictions. And it is simply inconceivable to me that this office would be eliminated before its work is done.”
Feingold: “The need continues. And if we have this premature termination of the program on an artificial date of next year, we’re going to lose a lot of accountability and oversight for taxpayers. … This is something that has actually gone right, and it would be a real serious mistake to undo it prematurely.”
Subscribe to RSS