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 21, 2000
FCC De-Politicization Act of 2000 - Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit any member, officer, or employee of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from: (1) expressing the support or opposition of the FCC to any legislation or appropriation; or (2) requesting or suggesting on behalf of the FCC that any organization, entity, or person should communicate to any Member of Congress the support or opposition of that organization, entity, or person to any legislation or appropriation, unless either such action has been approved by FCC majority vote. Allows an approved action to be carried out only by FCC members and the staffs of the offices of such members, and not by officers or employees of any other FCC component..States that such prohibitions shall not prohibit any FCC member from expressing individual opinions with respect to any legislation or appropriation.
People & committees
Rep. Oxley, Michael G. [R-OH-4] · R–OH
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.
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 20, 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.4712 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.4712 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.4712 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.4712 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.