Western South Dakota News

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senators John Thune (R-S.D.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) have called on Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel to abandon a proposal they claim infringes on free political speech. In their letter, the senators argue that the FCC lacks broad authority over political advertising and that the proposal would place unreasonable burdens on local broadcasters and cable companies.

"Lacking any statutory authority for the proposal under the BCRA, the FCC alternatively claims it has an amorphous public interest obligation to ‘protect the public from false, misleading, or deceptive programming and to promote an informed public.’ This falsely suggests that the FCC has broad authority to act as an arbiter of true and false speech," wrote the senators. "The FCC’s role should remain within the confines of its designated responsibility: ensuring basic recordkeeping requirements without encroaching on the content of political discourse or favoring one type of political advertising over another."

The full letter addressed to Chairwoman Rosenworcel reads:

"We write today in opposition to your proposal to regulate artificial intelligence (AI) in political advertising. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has no authority to police the content of political advertising and any attempt to do so raises serious statutory and constitutional concerns.

Moreover, since the proposed rules would only apply to regulated entities like broadcasters and cable companies – and not their unregulated big tech counterparts – the proposal picks winners and losers and risks confusing voters on the eve of a federal election.

Rather than favoring certain political speech and interfering in the election, we urge you to abandon this dangerous proposal that threatens to tip the scales of free speech in our nation.

The FCC’s press release cites the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) as its basis of legal authority for the proposal, but that law only requires licensees to maintain records of requests to purchase airtime for political advertising. It does not give the FCC authority to compel certain messages, and it certainly did not give the FCC broad authority over political advertising.

As Federal Election Commission (FEC) Chairman Sean Cooksey has made clear, 'the FEC is the sole authority empowered to regulate political disclaimers' and 'nothing in the BCRA empowers the FCC to impose its own affirmative disclaimer requirements on political communications.' Any attempt to expand the authority provided by BCRA is unlawful.

Lacking any statutory authority for this proposal under BCRA, the FCC alternatively claims it has an amorphous public interest obligation 'to protect the public from false, misleading, or deceptive programming and promote an informed public.' This falsely suggests that the FCC has broad authority to act as an arbiter of true and false speech. The FCC’s role should remain within its designated responsibility: ensuring basic recordkeeping requirements without encroaching on political discourse or favoring one type of political advertising over another.

The proposal also creates asymmetric burdens that risk confusing voters. As FCC Commissioner Carr has pointed out, these disclaimer rules would apply only to broadcasters but not their largely unregulated big tech counterparts. This risks 'muddy[ing] waters' for voters who 'don’t think about content through regulatory silos.' This action will result in uneven application of these rules where an advertisement seen on broadcast TV includes an AI disclosure but similar content offered through a media service not regulated by FCC will not. This discrepancy does not reflect how consumers interact with media and could create misleading impressions about consumed content.

Furthermore, Americans believe in a marketplace of ideas sanctity; they do not want or need government overreach on these issues. Americans can make their own determinations after watching or hearing a political advertisement – that is not government’s role.

Moreover, it is unreasonable expecting broadcasters have necessary tools or technical expertise verifying whether images/sounds in a political ad generated with AI. Requiring broadcasters act as gatekeepers for AI-generated content imposes unreasonable burden resulting substantial legal/operational challenges undermining local journalism facing enormous competitive pressures from big tech companies.

Finally, Congress conferred independence on FCC so it would be free from control exercised by president over Executive Branch. Independent agencies were never meant serving instruments advancing presidential campaigns/national committees agendas aligning closely broader agenda advocated Democrat National Committee urging FEC introduce sweeping regulations governing AI-generated political speech before 2024 elections unfortunate behaving less independent commission accountable Congress more de facto arm Biden campaign."

"We strongly urge you reconsider effort regulating AI in political advertising."