Representatives Bart Stupak (D-MI) and Steven LaTourette (R-OH) have written to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and Assistant Attorney General Thomas Bennett, regarding the proposed XM/Sirius merger.
Stupak and LaTourette asked that both organizations deny the proposed satellite radio merger.
The letter seems to repeat the NAB's mantra, referring back to the original 1997 SDARS license that stated that there must be at least two satellite radio providers. The FCC is currently seeking public comment regarding this exact language in the license.
The Congressmen also say that XM and Sirius are different from terrestrial radio and iPods.
"There is currently no existing audio service or product that qualifies as a viable substitute for satellite radio that could constrain the behavior of an XM-Sirius monopoly," Stupak and LaTourette wrote.
Stupak and LaTourette concluded by asking that the DOJ and FCC "preserve national radio competition, and safeguard the interests of American consumers by denying this merger."
This opposition comes on the heals of a separate letter, signed by 72 members of the House, asking to have the merger denied.
[Read full letter (PDF) via FMQB]
Good. This merger is a bad idea. It stinks and I don't like it.
Wouldn't allowing the merger give Primosphere the chance to take a license that will bascially be forced to come off of the merger, soon thereafter? Then again there'd be two companies with satellite licenses. There are many agreements that can be made to allow the merger, and it's so far from bad. More channel options without being forced to pay more...most likely the same for your same options, less money for smaller packages, and more for larger.
That makes 74 out of 435 total representatives. If I hear around 200 I'll start to feel like it's not going to happen.
I figure this is pretty obvious, but why don't Sirius and XM merge, but hand over or just rent out some bandwidth to some other competitor. They could pick one of these sloppy services like Slacker who don't stand a hope in hell of ever figuring things out. Also, whose to say that chunk needs to be 50% of the available bandwidth, why not a tiny 5% sliver. Audio compression has gotten better since these companies launched, they could claim a competitor could launch a whole slew of low quality channels, always ensuring an economic alternative.
Great more congressional assholes paid off by the NAB...get to more pressing issues..you assholes like getting our troops out of Iraq and stop voting against a merger you don't care about excapt when you're getting paid to vote against it.
0.0 told me not to like the merger.
I do everything 0.0 tells me to do. I think everything 0.0 tells me to think. I say "Ramooone" and "Shitdick" and "Hoo Hoo". I was recently re-programmed by 0.0 to say "Frunkiss".
And, I even think hack crap like "Rock Scream Tuesday" is actually... funny!
Oh - but I'm not a "zombie", am I?
Ba-aaa-aaahh.
- Oh - but I'm not a "zombie", am I? -
nope.. you're a cunt
Theres politics involved with this merger????
@JckMyrHffr
There will be no merger if the combined monopoly doesn't get to keep both licenses.
I actually think Slacker radio has a chance since they seem to be doing it the right way, slowly. I think that the thing the NAB and those brainwashed congressmen miss is that people really only listen to one thing at a time. So if I'm listening to my local radio station, I'm not listening to Sirius and vice versa. So why isn't Sirius and XM suing the NAB for unfair competition since they're broadcasting too and therefore have a monopoly on my ears if I'm listening to their station instead of Sirius. In addition, there are things that my satellite provider doesn't have that I sometimes want on the local station. For example, Sirius doesn't carry Morning Edition on NPR and The World on PRI. So, I have to listen to my local station. Where's the lack of competition?
Sheesh.
i'm not an o&a fan and i think the merger is a bad idea. so stop your crying SatRadMadMan
0.0 came out against the merger?
Wait, when did Stern come out against the merger? I mean, those are his ratings, and his effect on popular culture.
Wait.. did you mean O&A? They never came out against the merger. Not once. I'm suprised you didn't know that, seeing that you listen enough to list off catchphrases and know enough to throw in "Rock Scream Tuesday" . Let me guess - Stern's on vacation - again. As for the bit, Hey moron! Its supposed to be hacky! Thats the joke! It's Dosn't Get the Bit Guy.
Ever notice you don't see O&A guy taking random shots at Stern unless a Stern zombie mentions them first? Hmmm..
Is that a train, you haven't been here long have you? There are more shots coming from O&A guys first. You just probably block them out of do not look at a lot of posts. Or it might be that the O&A guys got tired of doing for so long. YEARS
SatRadMan, I'm against the merger until I hear solid info on how it will effect me and my service. I don't care who is for or against it. I can make up my own mind and don't need any radio personalities to tell me what to do. Mel has given zero concrete plans for post merger, just a lot of "we may do this or we may do that". Don't ask for my support in bailing out your company without explaining exactly how this will effect me and what the plans are. And general statements don't count. I want to know: Will I have to listen to annoying Sirius DJ's, will I lose any of the channels I love. Like most people I listen to a handful of regulars. The loss of even one of those would amount to a 20% loss of channels I listen to. Will XM or Sirius's programming be the culture? I don't like Sirius's music offerings. Will my current device's work and for how long. Will I get a great device like the Inno with the ability to save and delete individual tracks and create playlists or will I be stuck recording blocks that I can't edit by a company w/o the balls to fight the RIAA. Will I continue to get free highspeed internet service or will I have to pay extra like Sirius subs do. If al a carte channels are offered, what will the pricing structure be? In most studies of a la carte pricing, consumers were stuck with higher bills for less channels. Perhaps you should give a little more thought before blindly supporting something because you were told to.