PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Star Print ordered on the reported bill.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Oct 26, 2000
Children's Protection From Violent Programming Act - Directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to: (1) assess the effectiveness of measures to require television broadcasters and multichannel video programming distributors to rate and encode programming that could be blocked by parents by use of a V-chip; and (2) report its findings annually to specified congressional committees. Authorizes the FCC, if it finds such measures ineffective, to complete a rulemaking prohibiting the distribution of violent video programming during hours when children are reasonably likely to comprise a substantial portion of the audience.Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to make it unlawful for any person to distribute to the public any violent video programming not blockable by electronic means specifically on the basis of its violent content. Authorizes the FCC, as part of its rulemaking proceedings, to exempt programming (including news programs and sporting events) whose distribution does not conflict with the objective of protecting children from the negative influences of violent video programming. Exempts premium and pay-per-view direct-to-home satellite programming.Directs the FCC to: (1) impose a forfeiture penalty of up to $25,000 on any person who violates such requirements; and (2) revoke any broadcasting or distribution license issued, in the case of repeat violators.Requires the FCC to study and report to specified committees on the marketing to children of violent content by the motion picture, music recording, and computer and video game industries, including whether such practices have improved under a specified model of self-regulation recommended by the FCC.
People & committees
Sen. Hollings, Ernest F. [D-SC] · D–SC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Star Print ordered on the reported bill.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 953.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator McCain with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 106-509. Additional views filed.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator McCain with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 106-509. Additional views filed.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 106-862.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4187-4188)
Introduced in Senate
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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 S.876 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 S.876 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 S.876 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 S.876 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.