PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 10, 1997
Local Television Competition and Diversity Act of 1997 - Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to direct the Federal Communications Commission not to prohibit a person or entity directly from owning, operating, or controlling, or from having a cognizable interest in, two television stations within the same television market if at least one of such stations is a UHF television station, unless the Commission determines that permitting such activities will significantly harm competition or the preservation of a diversity of media voices in such market. Allows the Commission, in unusual and compelling circumstances, to permit a person or entity to own, operate, or control, or to have a cognizable interest in, two VHF television stations within the same television market if the applicant demonstrates that it will not significantly harm competition or the preservation of a diversity of media voices in that market.
People & committees
Rep. Stearns, Cliff [R-FL-6] · R–FL
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, Trade, and Consumer Protection.
Referred to the House Committee on Commerce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1169-1170)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 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.1859 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.1859 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.1859 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.1859 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.