If you don't think Clinton's Telecom Act of '96 was disastrous for the party, read this:

[mod mom]

JUST ONE EXAMPLE, BUT IT WAS A CLOSE RACE & NOW THE GOP WILL ENJOY CONTROL OF OHIO RE-DISTRICTING:

Fox's role in Kasich campaign questioned

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2010 02:53 AM
BY MARK NIQUETTE AND JOE HALLETT
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH


In a segment of his Oct.14 Hannity program on Fox News, host Sean Hannity criticized President Barack Obama about the federal stimulus program and turned to Ohio Republican gubernatorial candidate John Kasich for reaction.

But the talk shifted to how many times the president and Vice President Joe Biden have campaigned in Ohio for Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland, including an Obama rally that was coming up in Columbus.

"People can come on our website at kasichforohio.com Sunday night at 6:30," Kasich told Hannity, announcing a webcast he planned at the same time as Obama's rally. "We're going to talk about the damage the Obama agenda has done to us. And if you have any extra nickels or dimes, please send it our way: kasichforohio.com."

It was one of 16 appearances that Kasich has made on Fox television or radio programs since he formally entered the governor's race on June 1, 2009, according to a count by the Strickland campaign.

-snip
http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/10/27/copy/foxs-role-in-kasich-campaign-questioned.html?adsec=politics&sid=101

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This study tells the story of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and its aftermath. In many ways,
the Telecom Act failed to serve the public and did not deliver on its promise of more competition,
more diversity, lower prices, more jobs and a booming economy.

Instead, the public got more media concentration, less diversity, and higher prices.

Over 10 years, the legislation was supposed to save consumers $550 billion, including $333 billion in
lower long-distance rates, $32 billion in lower local phone rates, and $78 billion in lower cable bills.
But cable rates have surged by about 50 percent, and local phone rates went up more than 20 percent.
Industries supporting the new legislation predicted it would add 1.5 million jobs and boost the economy
by $2 trillion. By 2003, however, telecommunications’ companies’ market value had fallen by about
$2 trillion, and they had shed half a million jobs.

And study after study has documented that profit-driven media conglomerates are investing less in news
and information, and that local news in particular is failing to provide viewers with the information they
need to participate in their democracy
Why did this happen? In some cases, industries agreed to the terms of the Act and then went to court
to block them. By leaving regulatory discretion to the Federal Communications Commission, the Act
gave the FCC the power to issue rules that often sabotaged the intent of Congress. Control of the House
passed from Democrats to Republicans, more sympathetic to corporate arguments for deregulation.
And while corporate special interests all had a seat at the table when this bill was being negotiated, the
public did not. Nor were average citizens even aware of this legislation’s great impact on how they
got their entertainment and information, and whether it would foster or discourage diversity of
viewpoints and a marketplace of ideas, crucial to democratic discourse.

-SNIP
http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%7BFB3C17E2-CDD1-4DF6-92BE-BD4429893665%7D/FALLOUT_FROM_THE_TELECOMM_ACT_5-9-05.PDF

[spanone]

1. it was bad for many things....it ruined radio by consolidation