PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 14, 2005
Localism in Broadcasting Reform Act of 2005 - Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to reduce from eight to three years the term for radio or television broadcasting licenses issued by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Requires full FCC review of at least five percent of the applications filed each year.
Requires every broadcaster to file electronically with the FCC a copy of its public interest issues and programs list and its children's programming reports within ten days after the end of each quarter. Allows a waiver of such requirement for good cause shown. Requires such list and reports to be made available on publicly accessible websites of such stations.
Requires the standards for a station's license renewal to include review of the licensee's other stations (if any).
Requires the FCC, within nine months after the enactment of this Act, to complete action on two specified proceedings concerning disclosure requirements and public interest obligations of television broadcast licensees.
People & committees
Rep. Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [D-NY-28] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E663)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 15, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1665 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1665 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1665 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1665 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.