| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Television Isn't A Privilege, It's A Right |
| 2005-11-14 |
| The federal government wants to pay for some U.S. residents to be able to watch television -- the only question is how much. The Senate's budget bill, which passed last week, contains a $3 billion subsidy for owners of televisions that are not ready to handle the eventual transition to digital television. The House budget bill, which ran into trouble Thursday but which will be on the floor this week, contains slightly less than $1 billion. Both bills set a date when broadcasters must return their current licenses and instead broadcast a digital signal on a different part of the electronic spectrum. The subsidy would go to pay for converter boxes, which would take the digital signal from the broadcasters and convert it so that it can be displayed by analog TVs. Televisions hooked up to cable or satellite would not need the converters, nor would televisions capable of receiving a digital signal. "There are enough low-income Americans that would have difficulty coming up with the $40 or the $50 for a conversion box, so we want to help them out on a one-time basis," said House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Joe L. Barton, Texas Republican, who is pushing for finishing the transfer to digital broadcasting... |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #18 help them out on a one-time basis "One time basis" only a statement like that could be made by a politician. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2005-11-14 22:11 |
| #17 Seems rather apt.... http://www.queenofwands.net/d/20051108.html |
| Posted by: SJB 2005-11-14 21:57 |
| #16 Ain't the point. The point is, they're using my tax dollars to pay for conversion boxes so a bunch of slack-jaws can watch tv. That's high-definition bullsh*t. |
| Posted by: BH 2005-11-14 18:10 |
| #15 rjswartz:"...this means my grandmother has to buy new equipment and I have to set it up. " Boo Hoo! Does Grandma currently have Cable/Dish? If so, and she is happy with that, where is the need to get her new equipment? If not, then get her some knitting needles or something and she can make you a nice sweater or something. TV-Man |
| Posted by: TV-Man 2005-11-14 18:07 |
| #14 All they need to do is have the cable company configure it so they don't need a cable box. I have Comcast cable througout my house (six rooms) and none of them use a cable box. When I lived in another county I needed one but not in the current one, it's all about regulation. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2005-11-14 17:58 |
| #13 where's the "t", rj? |
| Posted by: Shase Gleregum2178 2005-11-14 17:46 |
| #12 TV-Man I don't care how long the broadcasters have had, this means my grandmother has to buy new equipment and I have to set it up. The government should not be in the position of forcing technology into obsolecence, that is for the market to do. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2005-11-14 17:43 |
| #11 "There really is something stupid about forcing every television channel to shift to digital. I want digital as well but come on, that requires everyone to buy new equipment for no real good reason." Bull Shit! The broadcasters have known this for 2 or three years now, and the date is set for 2007/08. It is being done to free up spectrum currently used to broadcast analog TV. Ultimately this IS a GOOD DEAL for the consumer and the broadcasters. HDTV is easily received without need of Cable/Dish providers. The picture quality is superior, and the long term costs are easily absorbed. If you currently have a decent but non-digital TV and cable/dish service then the issue is moot. Besides, it gives you something to shoot for. By the time the switch is made there will plenty of reasonably priced sets capable of receiving the digital broadcasts with just an antenna. If you can afford a TV and cable/dish service now, you'll be able to afford a new digital capable TV when the time comes. It isn't as if folks didn't have plenty of notice. TV-Man |
| Posted by: TV-Man 2005-11-14 17:14 |
| #10 Television is the new opiate of the masses. |
| Posted by: mmurray821 2005-11-14 17:06 |
| #9 Its long past the time that open broadcast television be treated like mining or logging on federal land. Now only should a license be paid annually, but a royalty for profit. It's not like television is a budding technology needing government protection and husbandry. Upset about big oil profits, you ought to check out the television industry. |
| Posted by: Flaise Juper4620 2005-11-14 17:03 |
| #8 I want digital as well but come on, that requires everyone to buy new equipment for no real good reason. No good reason, unless you look at which politicians benefited from the digital bandwidth sell-off. Imagine sub-carriers for second language dubbing piggybacked onto regular broadcast frequencies. Imagine doubled channel density on your dial. There's lots of reasons for this happening, except that from what I've heard, the fire-sale of these valuable on-air slots to industry was anything but in the public interest. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2005-11-14 16:52 |
| #7 The federal government wants to pay for some U.S. residents to be able to watch television... I know plenty of people already in this program... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2005-11-14 16:24 |
| #6 There really is something stupid about forcing every television channel to shift to digital. I want digital as well but come on, that requires everyone to buy new equipment for no real good reason. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2005-11-14 15:57 |
| #5 I can only guess that these subsidies will kick in during an election year so the public won't have to miss a single precious minute of network campaign broadcasting. This is Homer Simpson's dream come true. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2005-11-14 15:07 |
| #4 Please. Most are getting cable or Digial Satelite and their will be no problem. The rest will beg borrorw or steal to get a converter box at WalMat. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom 2005-11-14 15:03 |
| #3 Millions of Americans cut off from the BS sound bites that substitute for political discourse in this country. And the downside is...? |
| Posted by: BrerRabbit 2005-11-14 14:42 |
| #2 Can I get mine with High Def? |
| Posted by: net tax receiver 2005-11-14 13:54 |
| #1 Jeez, more nonsensical spending plans by the supposed party of small government... |
| Posted by: Raj 2005-11-14 13:41 |