National Call-In Radio Day

The Prometheus Radio Project is among the organizers of the day to help bring low-power FM to communities throughout the United States. Join people from across the country to tell Congress to open up the airwaves for more community media!

TAKE ACTION - Tell your Congressional Representative to support HR 1147.

1. Look up your Congressional Representative at Congress.org

2. Find out if they have already supported the Local Community Radio Act.
See a list of cosponsors at govtrack.us and search for Bill number HR 1147.

3. Call the Congressional Switchboard at: (202) 224-3121 and ask to be connected to your Representative's office.

If your representative is not a cosponsor tell he/she to support expanding Low Power FM all across the country and cosponsor the bill.

If your representative is a cosponsor ask him/her to reach out to Congressional Leadership to let them know that this is an important priority around the country.

Background:
In 2000, the FCC established Low Power FM radio service and the same year Congress acted to limit LPFM, pending the results of an interference study. This study was released in 2003, after an expenditure of $2.2 million in taxpayer dollars, and proved that LPFM would not provide interference to existing stations. There are currently over 800 LPFM stations operated by schools, churches, civic groups, and other nonprofit organizations across the country. However, it's time, as the authors of this study and the FCC recommended, to expand LPFM to its intended service parameters. The Local Community Radio Act (HR 1147/S592) would expand Low Power FM radio stations and open the airwaves up to potentially tens of thousands of new community radio stations across the country.

FMjam

Last night at free103point9's Noise! festival at the Ontological Theater in Manhattan, Jeremy Slater and Tamara Yadao used the FMjam transmitter in his performance. It is a small transmitter with numerous effects on it, marketed to guitar players and such who want to jam together. Slater and Yadao both played with one, and the FMjam allowed them to both perform on the same radio frequency. Apparently, up to five people can "jam" together on the same frequency with this transmitter.

Low power FM radio to the rescue

By Gabriel Voiles from Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting:

Lamenting the fact that "commercial radio stations everywhere have been swallowed up by a handful of giant corporations, playlists have shrunk and local and independent acts have been drowned out," Free Press activist Timothy Karr (MediaCitizen, 2/26/09) also lets us know that

the good news is that your rescue is at hand. On Tuesday, Reps. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) and Lee Terry (R-Neb.) introduced a bipartisan bill (the Local Community Radio Act of 2009) that would pry open our radio airwaves for thousands of new stations, bringing independent acts...to the audiences they deserve....

The Local Community Radio Act would unleash the potential of new music for millions of listeners across the country. The bill tasks Washington with licensing thousands of Low Power FM radio stations....

There are about 800 low-power stations already on the air. They're run out of college campuses, garages, backyard shacks and local churches, and aimed specifically at listeners in their surrounding neighborhood.

Beyond saving listeners from corporate stations' "mind-numbing concoction of saccharine and aspartame," some LPFM broadcasters "are providing local news and information that in more extreme cases has kept people alive." Use the Free Press action page to demand your congressmember "help restore much needed diversity to our airwaves, bringing forth new voices and viewpoints that are often overlooked by large commercial broadcasters."

Dates set for comments on the relationship between Low Power FM stations, FM translators, and Full Power FM upgrades

From Broadcast Law Blog:

Federal Register publication of the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Low Power FM (LPFM) stations and their relationship to FM translators and upgrades of full-power FM stations occurred today. This sets the comment dates in that proceeding - with comments due April 7, and replies on April 21. This proceeding looks at technical issues of whether LPFM stations (which were originally authorized as secondary stations, subject to being knocked off the air if they caused interference to full-power stations (including new stations or increases in the facilities of existing stations), should be protected against interference from such new FM facilities. Also, the proceeding looks at whether LPFM should get a preference over FM translators, perhaps even being able to bump existing FM translators off the air to make way for new LPFM stations. We wrote more about this proceeding, here. FM station and FM translator licensees should be sure to file comments with the FCC on how this proceeding could affect their operations.

Also, free103point9's Tom Roe and Dharma Dailey met last week with the FCC in Washington, with a large group of low-power FM advocates organized by the Prometheus Radio Project, and were told they would publish the MX groups for the recent full-power non-commercial filing within "two to three months."

FCC meeting adopts rules favoring LPFM, restricting translator applications, and possibly impeding full service FM station upgrades

From David Oxenford in Broadcast Law Blog:

In an unusually contentious FCC meeting, the FCC adopted rules that promote Low Power FM ("LPFM") stations seemingly to the detriment of FM translators and improvements in the facilities of full-power FM stations. While no formal text of the decision has yet been released, the Commission did release a Public Notice summarizing its action. However, given the lack of detail contained in the Notice as to some of the decisions - including capping at 10 the number of translator applications from the 2003 FM translator window that one entity can continue to process and the adoption of an interim policy that would preclude the processing of full-power FM applications that created interference that could not be resolved to an existing LPFM station - it appears that the Press Release was written before these final details were determined. And given that the two Republican Commissioners dissented from aspects of this order supported by their Chairman (and also dissented on certain cable items considered later in the meeting), one wonders about the process that resulted in the Republican chairman of the FCC voting with the two Democratic Commissioners on an item that in many respects favors LPFM stations to the detriment of existing broadcast operators.

In any event, specific decisions mentioned in today's meeting include:

*Treating changes in the Board of Directors of an LPFM station as minor ownership changes that can be quickly approved by the FCC
*Allowing the sale of LPFM stations from one non-profit entity to another
Tightening rules requiring local programming on these stations
*Maintaining requirements that LPFM stations must be locally owned, and limiting groups to ownership of only one station
*Limiting applicants in the 2003 FM translator window to processing only 10 pending applications each, and requiring that they decide which 10 applications to prosecute before any settlement window opens (the two Republican Commissioners favored allowing applicants to continue to process up to 50 applications)
*Adopting an interim policy requiring that full-power FM stations that are improving their facilities in such a way that their improvement would interfere with an LPFM station to work with the LPFM to find a way to eliminate or minimize the interference. If no resolution could be found, the full-power station's application would not be processed (which we have expressed concerns about before)
*Urging that Congress repeal the ban on the FCC making any changes that would eliminate protections for full power stations from third-adjacent channel interference from LPFMs.

In a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission will apparently go further to aide LPFM applicants. The Further Notice will ask for comments on:

Potentially giving LPFM stations a status superior to that of FM translators
Looking at the relationship between LPFM and full power stations to see what permanent rules can be adopted to avoid having changes in full power stations preclude the continued operation of a LPFM facility - including the possibility that full power operators would have to pay the costs of relocating LPFM stations to different channels or transmitter site locations. Revising the LPFM rules to use contour protection interference techniques, rather than the strict mileage separations currently required. The new rules, and the new proposals could have a significant effect on broadcasters. Applicants who had a significant number of applications still pending in the 2003 window will likely have most of their applications dismissed (losing their investments in time and money in preparing those applications in 2003). The dismissal of many of these applications may impede service to the public as some of these translators would likely replace translators that may be bumped by new noncommercial stations proposed in the recent noncommercial FM filing window. And AM licensees who were hoping that some of these translators could be granted to provide them with FM translators on which their signals could be broadcast may not have such as many opportunities.

For full power stations, many of the simplified city-of-license change procedures that were only recently adopted to allow easier improvements for FM stations may now be complicated again, as LPFM stations will have to be protected. These LPFM stations, which were licensed as secondary facilities, may now be precluding new service by full-power primary stations.

As stated above, the full text of the decision has not been released - this summary is from statements made at the FCC meeting and from the Press Release that is lacking in many essential details. Broadcasters should be alert for that order to determine exactly how these new rules, and the potential for even more changes in the future, may affect their current or planned operations.

Statement of the Prometheus Radio Project on announcement of impending FCC notice on LPFM radio

From Prometheus Radio Project:

On Tuesday, November 20, the Federal Communications Commission announced that it was ready to pass a set of provisions amending the rules that govern the low power FM radio (LPFM) service -- a noncommercial radio service that hundreds of schools, churches, municipalities, and community groups use to connect with their local communities. Below is the press statement of Pete Tridish, founder of the Prometheus Radio Project, on the announcement.

Click here for a printable copy of this statement: http://www.prometheusradio.org/media/rulemaking_announcement_LPFM_nov_21_2007_final.doc

Click here for a link to the FCC meeting agenda, announcing their intent to make some major decisions on the low power FM radio service: http://www.fcc.gov/realaudio/#nov27.

Click here for a statement from Congressman Mike Doyle (D-PA) and Congressman Lee Terry (R-NE), sponsors of the Local Community Radio Act of 2007, on the priority of low power FM radio stations over translators: http://www.prometheusradio.org/media/doyle_terry_translators_FCC_july_2007.pdf

Contact: Pete Tridish, Prometheus Radio Project Founder: 215-727-9620 x 501, 215-605-9297, petri@prometheusradio.org.

"In recent weeks, the Federal Communications Commission, and FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, have made strong public statements about supporting the low power FM radio service, and the vital work that it does nationwide. As the commission works at its November 27th meeting to make decisions about the future of LPFM, they must lay the groundwork to ensure that LPFM will not only be available in rural areas in the future. They must also protect the low power stations from losing their frequencies to full power stations that encroach upon their signals, and threaten to knock them off the air.

As a diverse set of groups, including Prometheus, have proposed over recent years, the FCC must prioritize local low power FM radio stations over translator chains fed by distant signals. The FCC has frozen the granting of translator licenses for the time being, to investigate the practices of these chains and to balance the priority of distant translator use with the needs of local radio. The FCC cannot move to lift the current freeze on the granting of licenses to these translator chains without prioritizing local radio over these distant-fed translators. Without remedying this problem, the Commission is telling the American public that they are prioritizing these distant voices, once and for all, and informing local groups that would like one single, local, hundred-watt-or-less radio station that there is no room on the dial left for them.

When Congress temporarily limited LPFM in 2000, they mandated that the FCC study whether or not there would be room for these vital stations in America's cities and smaller communities. During the exact moment when this study and its technical field tests were being completed in 2003, the FCC made the mistake of allowing a handful of speculators to apply for translator licenses on thousands of the very same channels that had been promised for LPFM use. When it comes to translators and low power FM radio stations, the FCC allocates spectrum based simply upon who filed their application first. If the FCC chooses to prioritize these translator applicants, all of the frequencies that the FCC designed for LPFM use back in 2000 will have been given away.

In that 2003 window, a single translator applicant applied for 2500 licenses to broadcast, nationwide. One radio station currently has 792 translator applications repeating its signal.

In 2005, the FCC wisely froze translator applications like those listed above in order to find an intelligent resolution. In recent statements, Chairman Martin announced a limited proposal to reject some of these applicants, but if the FCC wants to support low power FM radio, they have a lot of work to do.

No matter what happens in Congress, LPFM will only be available in America's cities if the FCC acts to make room for it. The Commission needs to revise the spectrum priority relationship between LPFMs and these distant translator chains. There are a number of ways that this can be done without affecting the legitimate use of repeating stations by local networks.

In terms of low power FM stations being encroached upon by full power stations that want their signals -- while dozens of stations are under threat of this happening in the next weeks or months, the Commission and its staff should be commended for the work they've done, case by case, to make room for both these threatened stations and the full power stations moving into their path.

We encourage the Commission to continue to address the simplest displacement cases now and relieve the hold up on some of these less problematic encroachments. The few, tougher cases should remain on hold for settlement until, through further comment, more innovative solutions are found. Also, hasty judgment should not be made on the fate of low power stations suffering dramatically increased interference through encroachments -- more solutions can be found in these cases after further comment. Another excellent option for frequency availability for LPFMs at the disposal of the Commission is to use more detailed engineering methods -- methods which can open up a limited number of new options for communities. This could be exciting if the order of application problem (between the chains that got an opportunity to apply before communities got their chance) were resolved.

The statements that the FCC and Chairman Martin have made on the small ameliorative measures they might take for LPFM are helpful and well intentioned, and we'd like to give credit where credit is due -- but all of these measures pale in contrast to the prospect of America's cities never getting a fair chance at low power radio, and the importance of keeping low power FM radio stations serving their full communities.

Prometheus would heartily congratulate the hard work of the Chairman Martin and the FCC staff on this new low power notice, so long as the Commission does not:

1) foreclose the LPFM opportunity in the cities by ignoring the translator/LPFM priority problem, and

2) make hasty judgment on the hardest encroachment cases, and cases that do not involve displacement but do involve significant interference. These should be resolved after another round of comment and creative problem solving."

LPFM and the fight for community radio

From Liz Berg in WFMU Beware of the Blog:

Ever since the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was passed, the FCC has been required to periodically review the country's broadcast ownership rules. For those who may not know, the 1996 Act was responsible for widespread media consolidation: as ownership regs were loosened, companies like Clear Channel and Infinity Broadcasting were allowed to purchase many more stations across the country (and were also allowed to own more than two stations in a single market). Most recently, the FCC's 2006-07 review of the media ownership landscape has been met with unprecedented outcry; citizens are not happy about the homogenization of their airwaves, and are serving the feds with tons of public testimony and mounds of comments, urging them to steer clear of further ownership deregulation.

Localism, dull/homogeneous programming, and concerns about the lack of station ownership by women and minorities appear to be at the crux the public's beef with broadcast radio and TV. These sentiments were reflected during the FCC's town hall meeting on media consolidation in NYC last year which I attended, and you can read the wrap-up on this post (as well as listen to the whole damned thing).

It would seem as though the teeming masses who are upset with the current state of radio are simply asking for more community-based broadcasters. There is space reserved for community radio on the low end of the dial, but in many areas, religious conglomerates and NPR affiliates outbid local community groups for non-commercial, educational spectrum. So now, even non-commercial frequencies are sounding more and more alike across the U.S. No wonder the people are angry.

How do we solve the larger, interrelated problems of media consolidation and crappy programming? How do we allow more voices to be heard on the non-commercial end of the dial, especially those who don't have the resources to purchase and manage a full-powered FM station? A loaded answer would be LPFM.

The FCC re-established low-power radio licenses in 2000 as a response to an outraged citizenry, who were upset over massive media conglomeration just like they are today. Many believe that LPFM was not a real solution to the problem, as it relegates community radio to the teeny cracks of spectrum left over once the commercial giants and moneyed national non-profit groups had bought up all of the full-powered frequencies. Let the big guys broadcast at 50,000 W, and toss out 100 W scraps to community groups.

Although these inequities certainly illuminate the secondary (or some might argue tertiary) status of local broadcasters, something is better than nothing. The fact that local groups were even given a space on the public dial was monumentous in itself.

Today, the idea of establishing even more LPFM stations is gaining steam, with the Senate Commerce Committee voting to remove certain interference limitations for low-powered stations. The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) is arguing (as they did in the late 90s) that LPFM stations will cause third-channel interference problems for their member stations (mostly large commercial broadcasters). Although a study debunking this theory was just released, NAB is claiming that these findings are flawed and will continue to lobby against LPFM and S.1675 (the Local Community Radio Act). LPFM cannot be expanded until the House and Senate vote for this bill.

Prometheus Radio and Free Press are encouraging LPFM supporters to write to their representatives in support of S.1675. New Jersey residents in support of LPFM should pay special attention, as Senator Lautenberg has added an amendment to S.1675 that would essentially block any new LPFM licenses from being allowed in the Garden State.

FCC eyes LPFM order

From Radio World:

The battle over low-power FM and possible resulting interference has been off the front page for a while, but it’s simmering on Capitol Hill.

Speaking before the House Committee on Small Business last week, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said the agency is considering an order that would guarantee low-power FM stations will “have reasonable access to limited radio spectrum.”

He said this in the context of describing how the commission is providing opportunity for small businesses in radio with the advent of the LPFM service.

We recently reported that attorneys in a legal session during the NAB Radio Show said the FCC is holding up some major modification applications for full-service FMs if the changes would result in taking lower-power stations off the air — a big change in policy, considering LPFMs are licensed as secondary services.

Bills to expand Low Power FM radio to America's cities introduced in Congress!

From Prometheus Radio Project:

Hello supporters of low power FM Radio, and Greetings from the Prometheus Radio Project! Read below to get your Congressmembers signed on to expand low power FM radio to America's cities, smaller communities, and your neck of the woods.

You last heard from us in late June, when community radio hopefuls and broadcasters alike announced a breakthrough in the fight to bring low power FM radio licenses to thousands more cities and towns. On June 21, Congressman Mike Doyle (D-PA) joined Congressman Lee Terry (R-NE), as well as Senator John McCain and Senator Maria Cantwell, to introduce the Local Community Radio Act of 2007. This bill -- H.R. 2802 in the House and S. 1675 in the Senate -- is what we have been fighting for for years -- a chance for community radio hopefuls from Omaha to Orlando to get new licenses to build their own low power FM radio stations. (Learn more about how Congress limited low power FM radio in most American cities here -- http://www.prometheusradio.org/take_action/lpfm_in_congress).


Please help us to continue this momentum and get more Congressmembers to support low power FM radio. If we are able to get more Congressmembers to cosponsor this bill over the next week before Congress goes on vacation -- we'll be in great shape for a vote to expand community radio in the fall. No one will do this work for you -- we need you to make this call, or write a letter, for community radio, today.

You can find your Congressmember's information at
http://www.congress.org, or by calling the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121. You can also look them up at http://www.freepress.net/lpfm/.

Want more background? Read House Bill 2802 here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.2802: -- and read Senate Bill 1675 here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.1675:.
Or get summaries of low power FM facts at http://www.expandlpfm.org,
http://www.prometheusradio.org, or http://www.freepress.net/lpfm.

Check and see if your Congressmember has cosponsored the low power FM radio bill here -- http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR02802:@@@P -- some Congressmembers have committed to signing on, like the ones mentioned above, but aren't listed yet!

PPS -- Read a few great stories about the low power FM bills at MyDD.com:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/6/21/13024/5742

At the Black Agenda Report:
http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=259&Itemid=39

And from the United Methodist Church:
http://www.umc.org/site/apps/nl/content3.asp?c=lwL4KnN1LtH&b=2072531&ct=4027825

PPS -- Here's Mr. Doyle's question on low power FM radio today, at the Congressional Oversight Hearing for the FCC:

In 2004, the FCC issued a report to Congress on the Low Power FM Interference Testing Program after getting public comment on the engineering studies it commissioned. After reviewing all the facts, data and potential for interference, the FCC said in that report quote "Congress should re-address this issue and modify the statute to eliminate the third-adjacent channel distant separation requirements for LPFM stations." Anyone disagree with that?

(silence) Good.

Let the record show that the silence was deafening. My friend, Lee Terry and I have a bill to allow the FCC to expand the benefits low power FM onto more places on the radio dial across the country. LPFM has been critical during emergencies like Hurricane Katrina, to religious groups trying to spread their message and to community groups interested in serving their community. It's my hope that the Commission will continue to support these stations until and after we get this bill
signed into law.

Low Power FM expansion comes before the Senate

From Reclaim the Media:

Senators Maria Cantwell and John McCain have introduced a Senate bill to authorize hundreds of local, noncommercial Low Power FM radio stations to communities across the country. A companion bill was introduced in the House. The Local Community Radio Act of 2007 would remove the artificial restrictions imposed on LPFM by a 2000 law passed at the urging of corporate radio giants and NPR, claiming that small community stations would interfere with the signals of larger stations. While these claims were debunked by a taxpayer-funded study in 2002, Congress has not yet acted on those results - denying many communities the opportunity to apply for LPFM stations.

If passed, this bill will pave the way for educational groups, nonprofits, unions, schools and local governments to launch new local radio stations across the country. Get additional details from the Prometheus Radio Project, and express your support for local radio by signing the online petition at ExpandLPFM.org.

Bipartisan legislation was introduced today in both the House and Senate that would bring hundreds of local, Low Power FM (LPFM) radio stations to cities and suburbs across the country.

On a national press call this morning, the Indigo Girls joined religious groups, community radio broadcasters and public interest advocates in support of the "Local Community Radio Act of 2007" sponsored by Reps. Mike Doyle (D-Penn.) and Lee Terry (R-Neb.) in the House, and Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the Senate.

"Radio should reflect the vibrant diversity of music, points of view and news in our communities, not just the narrow content a few large radio conglomerates deem profitable," said Emily Saliers of the Indigo Girls. "The Local Community Radio Act can make this idea a reality and deserves the support of Congress and community groups across the country."

On the call, the House co-sponsors of the Local Community Radio Act explained the importance of the legislation.

"Diverse, informative, thought-provoking, locally oriented programming has been dramatically restricted across the country by the current federal laws governing the separation between broadcast frequencies," Congressman Mike Doyle said. "Enactment of this legislation would improve the quality of life in communities across the country by providing new and different programming -- and especially programming addressing local interests and events -- to these communities."

"I really believe Low Power Radio has the potential to make communities stronger," Congressman Lee Terry said. "Congress should be expanding the forums for our local communities to communicate. There are several groups in the Omaha area that want to apply for an LPFM station, and that s why I am working to push this legislation forward. I encourage my colleagues to jump on board and get more local stations on the air."

In response to the introduction of the Local Community Radio Act, FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein said: "Localism and diversity have always been at the heart of radio. Many Low Power FM stations across America reflect the best of these traditions and have flourished despite existing interference standards. As I've traveled throughout this country, I've seen local churches, schools and other community-based organizations use low power stations to broadcast locally relevant news, information and music. That's the essence of radio, and we should do all we can to promote it."

LPFM stations are community-based, noncommercial radio stations that broadcast to neighborhoods and small towns. LPFM licenses make owning a radio station possible for churches, schools, labor unions and other community groups that best understand the needs of their local communities.

"The founders of WRYR built our station to help educate our community, promote its uniqueness, and assist in fighting sprawl along the shores of the Chesapeake Bay," said WRYR-LP founder Mike Shay. "The station has focused people in our area to care even more about local businesses and environmental issues. Because of Low Power FM radio, we are more politically active, caring, and engaged, which has enabled us to make a difference in our community."

LPFM stations have also been essential in times of crisis. During Hurricane Katrina, LPFM stations in the Gulf Coast region stayed on the air and provided their neighbors with lifesaving information.

"Our low power station helped many people find shelter and restart their lives after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita," said John Freeman, director of the Southern Development Foundation and founder of Louisiana's KOCZ-LP, Opelousas Community Zydeco Radio. "Folks knew to listen to us during the storm, and to work with us and our community to rebuild, because our station was the strongest source of Zydeco music in the town where it was founded. Opelousas is relying on KOCZ for church services on Sunday, youth hip-hop programming, Gospel, health information, and more. Low Power FM is helping our community to grow."

In 2000, Congress authorized the FCC to issue LPFM licenses. But legislators attached an unnecessary rule that limited LPFM stations to rural areas. Since then, thousands who submitted applications with the FCC to operate their own stations have been blocked.

"Effective and meaningful communication vehicles are a must for cities like Omaha," said Tim Clark, president of the 100 Black Men of Omaha Chapter, an organization that has been unable to obtain an LPFM license. "The need for Low Power FM radio stations for inner cities is so important when it comes to creating a sense of community and purpose, and uplifting a people to move to action. With so many commercially driven stations mostly driven by the bottom line, the community does not have a voice -- no way to mobilize the community to action. New community Low Power FM stations will give an opportunity for people to have a greater appreciation for their history, cultural enrichment and community pride."

Since 2000, the FCC has awarded more than 800 LPFM licenses to church groups, schools and civil rights organizations. The bills introduced today would authorize the FCC to license hundreds -- if not thousands -- of new LPFM stations in cities, towns and suburbs across the country.

"We ve been building radio stations that strengthen local music and culture, give families access to their local governments, help diverse communities get on the air, and save lives -- in rural communities," said Hannah Sassaman, organizer with Prometheus Radio Project, a group that helps set up community radio stations. "We applaud Congressman Doyle and Congressman Terry for their great vision in bringing this vital service to America's cities."

"Radio consolidation has shrunk playlists and knocked whole genres of music such as jazz and bluegrass off the commercial dial," said Future of Music Coalition s Policy Director Michael Bracy. "The Local Community Radio Act holds the promise to return radio to what made it great: cutting edge music, diverse genres and voices, and local, community-based programming. This is something Congress should have done a long time ago."

In 2003, the FCC released a $2 million, taxpayer-funded study -- known as the "MITRE Study" -- which unequivocally found that increasing the number of LPFM stations would not cause significant interference. The FCC urged Congress to repeal the restrictions it had placed on licensing LPFM stations. But no action has been taken.

"The number of churches that could have been granted LPFM licenses could have been beyond 500 had the FCC been allowed to accept applications from more communities," said Dr. Ken Bowles, general manager of Midwest Christian Media and founder of KHIS-LP in Cape Girardeau, Mo. "The MITRE study was done at the direction of Congress. Congress now has an opportunity to remove the ill-advised ban and allow Christian low power broadcasting to flourish -- bringing new formats and localization to urban areas."

LPFM stations have been instrumental in allowing religious groups to broadcast their church services, reaching new audiences and people who are unable to leave their homes.

"We believe it is the responsibility of the church to foster public dialogue about matters that affect the quality of life of people in local communities. It is our experience that Low Power FM radio is more responsive to this dialogue and serves the community more effectively than corporations far removed from local concerns," said Rev. Larry Hollon, chief executive of United Methodist Communications.

"The power to speak is the power to persuade, and thus the power to change the world," said Cheryl Leanza, managing director of the United Church of Christ Office of Communication, Inc. "Low Power Radio is about giving many people voice who have been voiceless and powerless. The United Church of Christ is excited that this legislation will enable more community groups and churches to bring their voices to the airwaves."

The 1996 Telecommunications Act dramatically increased media consolidation - and decreased media diversity. LPFM stations provide opportunities for people of color and women to run local radio stations and for local groups to address issues affecting their community.

"Media consolidation has made it extremely difficult for women and people of color to become radio station owners," said Joe Torres, government relations manager of Free Press. "People of color own just 7.7 percent of all full-power radio stations and women own less than 6 percent. This important legislation would provide more people of color and women with opportunities they are denied in the commercial sector."

"Consumers Union strongly supports this legislation to provide more creative opportunities for communities to be heard in what has become a very consolidated radio marketplace," said Gene Kimmelman, vice president of federal and international affairs at Consumers Union.

"We are extremely pleased to see Congress moving forward legislation to bring more LPFM radio stations to communities throughout the country," said Parul Desai, assistant director of Media Access Project. "LPFM stations serve the needs of the local community, which are often neglected by commercial broadcasters. Our hope is that Congress acts quickly on this legislation so that constituents can begin to reap the benefits of a local voice in their community."

"Common Cause urges members of Congress to support the Low Power FM bill, said Lauren Coletta, senior director of media programs at Common Cause. Low Power FM stations are organized by local people to serve their communities in unique ways that commercial broadcasters are unwilling to do."

"In California, we've seen the value of radio stations that are local and community-driven," said Jeff Perlstein, executive director of Media Alliance. "It's high time Congress put these public resources -- these radio frequencies -- to work for the public."

"LPFM is a low-cost, high-democracy form of community media, said Anthony Riddle, executive director of Alliance for Community Media. "There ought to be a way for every community with the will and an idea to have its own voice. Congressmen Doyle and Terry shouldn't just be applauded-- they should be joined by every other member in supporting this eloquent and simple ideal."

"While other forms of media are consolidated and homogenous, Low Power FM remains an innovative outlet for local and diverse voices," said Amina Fazullah, staff attorney for U.S. PIRG. "This legislation is a great step forward towards a responsive media that serves citizens and not the corporate interest."