On the recordMarch 27, 2012
I appreciate the gentlewoman bringing the amendment forward. I rise in opposition to it today because in essence what it does is implements a study on the idea of these reforms. These reforms, again, are very basic. This just says, hey, a lot of these are already in place. It opens up the process to the American public. We believe in an open transparent government, an open and transparent system. This puts a study on the bill that simply has no timeline to it. Let me give you a quick example. The FCC is already behind on completing its reports. It didn't finish its satellite competition report for 2008 until 2011 and still hasn't finished the 2010 report on media ownership. So let's just be very honest with this. This is an attempt to kill this bill. This is an attempt to put a study on it that has no time line and simply allows the FCC to indefinitely delay the reforms that I think, frankly, the American people are demanding of Congress, demanding of Washington, which is to just open up government, let us know what's going on, be transparent. That's basic. That's what we stand for. With that, I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier). The amendment was rejected. The Acting CHAIR. The Committee will rise informally. The Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Kinzinger of Illinois) assumed the chair. ____________________





