PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 12, 1996
Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to declare it to be the policy of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to extend to licensed FM translator stations operating in a county of more than 750,000 persons that lacks a commercial FM station assignment: (1) authority (effective upon written notification to the FCC from the station licensee) for local programming origination, provided such a station abides by all FCC rules and regulations regarding program material, content, and schedule; and (2) authority (effective upon grant of a minor change application for construction permit) to operate with an effective radiated power not to exceed 1,000 watts, if the station is not located within 320 kilometers (approximately 199 miles) of either the Canadian or Mexican borders, such station's interfering contour would not create a new area of overlap attributable only to the station within the protected contour of a cochannel or first-adjacent channel facility, and the station complies with FCC requirements.
People & committees
Rep. Roukema, Marge [R-NJ-5] · R–NJ
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 Finance.
Referred to the House Committee on Commerce.
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: Jan 2, 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.3073 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.3073 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.3073 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.3073 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.