PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 779.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 6, 2000
Noncommercial Broadcasting Freedom of Expression Act of 2000 - Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to allow a nonprofit organization or entity to hold a noncommercial educational radio or television license (license) if the station is used primarily to broadcast material that such organization or entity determines serves an educational, instructional, or cultural purpose (such purposes) in that community, unless such determination is arbitrary or unreasonable.Prohibits the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from: (1) imposing or enforcing any requirement on such licenses based on the number of hours of programming that serve such purposes; (2) preventing religious programming from being determined to serve one of such purposes; or (3) imposing or enforcing any other programming content requirement that is not imposed on a licensee, permittee, or applicant for a commercial radio or television license.Prohibits the FCC from establishing, expanding, or otherwise modifying requirements relating to the service obligations of noncommercial educational radio or television stations except by means of agency rulemaking.
People & committees
Rep. Pickering, Charles W. "Chip" [R-MS-3] · R–MS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 779.
Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 264 - 159 (Roll no. 295).
House roll call 295 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 264 - 159 (Roll no. 295).
House roll call 295 · Individual votesDEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 527, the House proceeded with one hour of debate on the Markey amendment in the nature of a substitute.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 4201.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4201 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. The bill shall be considered in the House and shall be considered as read for amendment. The amendment recommended by the Committee on Commerce now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order. Provides for consideration of the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the Congressional Record, if offered by Mr. Markey or his designee, which shall be considered as read and shall be debatable for one hour equally divided between the proponent and an opponent.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 527. (consideration: CR H4684-4701; text of measure as reported in House: CR H4684)
Rule H. Res. 527 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 527 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4201 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. The bill shall be considered in the House and shall be considered as read for amendment. The amendment recommended by the Committee on Commerce now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order. Provides for consideration of the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the Congressional Record, if offered by Mr. Markey or his designee, which shall be considered as read and shall be debatable for one hour equally divided between the proponent and an opponent.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 368.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Commerce. H. Rept. 106-662.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Commerce. H. Rept. 106-662.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 11 - 5.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection.
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.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.4201 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.4201 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.4201 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.4201 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.