Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling this hearing. And thank you to all of our witnesses for being with us this morning. I am sure the Committee will benefit from your insight.

I think we all know why we are here today. During the past year, two of the four major networks, NBC and FOX, during live programming, broadcast the "F" word into millions of American homes. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) determined that NBC's broadcast did not violate the agency's rule against the broadcast of indecent speech, and the agency has not yet ruled on the FOX broadcast.

The fact that the FCC did not penalize the NBC network is curious to say the least, and I will discuss that in a minute. But the more pressing issue is how the networks permitted such speech to be aired into American homes.

The primary responsibility to ensure that network television does not contain profanity rests not with the FCC but with the networks themselves. The four major networks not only create the programming that a large segment of American viewers, including children, watch every day, but they are also the largest owners of television broadcast stations. They profit handsomely from their position, and they have a special responsibility to the citizens that have entrusted them with the public airwaves. It is certainly upsetting to me when this trust is repeatedly violated.

I am sorry that this panel does not include witnesses from NBC and FOX, because I would have liked to ask them about those broadcasts. I would have inquired as to what procedures and mechanisms were in place to prevent the airing of objectionable language, and I would have asked how that network has changed its practices to ensure that families watching live network TV need not worry as to what language will suddenly be thrust into their living rooms.

I think the Subcommittee would benefit from the answers to these questions. As no network has chosen to appear, I have written the presidents of the four major networks to ask these and other questions, and I have asked them to respond in a timely manner.

I ask, Mr. Chairman, that the letters be entered into the hearing record and that the record remain open to include the answers to these letters.

As the head of the FCC Enforcement Bureau, Mr. Solomon, I know that your decisions are constrained, as they should be, by certain legal boundaries, among them the Constitution and case law. I am not here to debate whether your decision in the NBC case was right or wrong. Your reputation is solid, and I am sure that your legal reasoning is defensible.

The problem, however, is that the decision defies common sense. And when an agency acts in such a way, it loses credibility. I do not think the American people will accept that we are powerless to prevent the use of such objectionable language during hours when children are watching television.

Like many Members of this Committee, I am also greatly concerned with the amount of indecent content broadcast over the radio airwaves. Recent penalties levied against radio broadcasters have been simply passed off as the cost of doing business and have proven inadequate to deter violators. I am, however, encouraged by yesterday's FCC decision to impose significantly increased penalties for indecent radio broadcasts.

Whether the FCC's decision was motivated by recent public outcry or in anticipation of today's hearing does not matter. Fear is a great motivator, and I am pleased with decision.

I hope that it signals a heightened seriousness on the part of the agency, and I will be watching closely to see that the FCC does not backtrack on its newfound aggressiveness on this issue.

I look forward to your testimony. In particular, I would like to learn more about what the Congress might do, consistent with the First Amendment, to curtail the increasing amount of filth that permeates the public airwaves.