8th Floor says Media Access access OK in OK case
So say three out of five commissioners at the FCC. The OK case involves the sale of five Oklahoma radio stations by Gene Stipe to various to various buyers. The deals were approved 1/18/05 and the approval made public 1/24/05, only to be overturned after Media Access Project's Andrew Schwartzman lobbied members of commission, complaining that the deals should not have been allowed given Stipe's conviction on non-FCC-related charges (2/28/05 RBR #41).
Attorneys for Stipe and at least one of the buyers have demanded that the three commissioners involved, and their staffs, recuse themselves from further deliberations since they may have been prejudiced by "reprehensible" MAP. The parties charge that MAP should have protested the transactions before they were granted, as provided for by the rules. "The Sellers and Buyers do not condemn MAP for wanting to communicate its concerns to the FCC about the Bureau's actions. Instead, they condemn MAP for the unlawful ways in which those communications were made, by presenting one-sided arguments that mischaracterize the facts and law, without offering the Parties the opportunity to refute those arguments in a timely fashion."
The commissioners and staffs involved are Michael Powell, Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein. They are not stepping aside. They say that, "Recusal is required only where there is a serious doubt about the agency's ability to act fairly and impartially..." It would be unfair if attorneys for the seller in fact do not have an opportunity to rebut the charges made by MAP. They say that the attorneys - - the request for recusal came from Richard R. Zaragoza of Shaw Pittman, representing a buyer, and David D. Oxenford, also of Shaw Pittman, representing the seller - - will be given ample access to MAP's testimony and ample opportunity to present their side "...before the Commission reaches any decision on the merits."
The commissioners said that to recuse themselves now "...threatens to encourage unwarranted recusal requests and interfere with the efficient and effective functioning of the agency."
Are you reading this from a forwarded email?
