Mr. BATZKA. Yes, but I feel that it probably will not be that many competitive applications.

Mr. BATZKA. No, it is based on what has happened. Where there have been competitive applications have been in the most severe cases. Senator PASTORE. Now, because it hasn't taken hold yet, but you wait until this prairie fire takes hold, you wait until this thing gets going, and you are going to have hundreds of competitive applications all over the country. You wait until this thing gets going. They are going to begin to read all the financial statements of the lucrative stations, and those are the ones they are going to hop on. You are going to have the biggest raid that you ever heard of.

You know why? There are a lot of dollars involved in this thing, and a lot of these entrepreneurs are looking for those dollars. I don't care who gets a license, whether it is A, B, C, or D and as long as I have been on this committee, and that goes way back many, many years, I have never intervened in any case where applicants were contesting, because it was none of my business and it shouldn't be any of my business. The FCC should be left alone to decide these cases as they see fit without any interference from any politician, no matter how influencial he may think he is.

Mr. BATZKA. I am not denying that. All I am asking is there is competition in the mass media market and I can't see that happenning if your bill is passed.

Senator PASTORE. Competition in the mass media market is the number of channels you have, the number of radio stations you have. They are competing against one another every day. They are out trying to outdo everybody every day. You are talking about the competition among entrepreneurs as to who shall own it. The question of whether you are going to get the pot of gold or me is not competition. Mr. BATZKA. In a city like Indianapolis, if you have a nice paper that takes a certain position and a certain press, I can give you personal illustrations of the problem of trying to get into mass media coverage in a community such as that.

Senator PASTORE. That is true. That problem is true all over. Even some of us politicians don't think they give us enough time that we want. Just because the station won't give you the time every time you want it doesn't necessarily mean that they are not serving the public. They may not be serving you, but they may be serving the public.

Maybe they are putting on Santa Claus at that time to please all the children in the neighborhood. I mean you have got to look at this thing objectively. I have had a lot of people come to me who have a complaint for this reason or that reason. You cannot use an instrumentality of uncertainty just because somebody feels that he has a certain personal feeling against the broadcasting industry. I mean you can't do it that way. I have got to look at the stability of the industry, what might happen to it. You pointed out the fact here that the original investment on a Texas station was about $4.5 million, and they sold it for $21 million. That is absolutely right,

Mr. BATZKA. The crux of the matter is the industry from my point of view if this bill isn't passed, they see themselves losing some of this profitable part in the selling of stations.

Senator PASTORE. So they will be frightened and do a better job?

Mr. BATZKA. I am not talking about being frightened, because they knew when they went into the broadcast media they had 3 years. That is what the franchise is all about.

Senator PASTORE. Three years with the reasonable opportunity if they did a good job they have a chance to survive. No one spends $21 million to stay in business 3 years. You know that. What kind of an industry are you going to have? Who is going to put up $21 million to stay in business for 3 years?

Mr. BATZKA. But they took it on a commitment for 3 years, and they knew they had another 3 years.

Senator PASTORE. They knew if they did a good job this country would recognize their performance. That is the question: Did they perform well? Not the question: Did they live for 3 years? That is the question here.

Don't you think that a man who has a franchise and does an exemplary job and takes care of the public ought to have a reasonable assurance that his performance will count on renewal hearing? Mr. BATZKA. Yes.

Senator PASTORE. That is what they have removed. Now they say everybody starts equal.

Mr. BATZKA. Who has removed this?
Senator PASTORE. The FCC.

Mr. BATZKA. You are talking about the Boston case?

Senator PASTORE. Right. That is the reason why this whole thing is up in an uproar. That is why it is up in an uproar. All I wanted to do I don't care how we do it all I want to do is to make past performance count. If it is bad, take the license away; if it is good, take it into account before you give it to somebody else. That is all I am trying to do.

Mr, BATZKA. Okay, based on the past performance of the FCC that is what they have basically done.

Senator PASTORE. But we are going to change the past history. That is why I am here.

Mr. BATZKA. I

Senator PASTORE. I know you don't think this bill does it, you have told me that four times, and I say it does. Let's leave it that way. There is a vote going on.

(Short recess.)

Senator PASTORE. Mr. Melia.

STATEMENT OF KAY MELIA, GENERAL MANAGER AND TREASURER, KLOE, INC., GOODLAND, KANS., PRESIDENT, KANSAS ASSOCIATION OF RADIO BROADCASTERS

Mr. MELIA. Mr. Chairman, my name is Kay Melia. I am general manager and treasurer of KLOE, Inc. of Goodland, Kans. I am also president of the Kansas Association of Radio Broadcasters. I am privileged to appear before you this morning on behalf of S. 2004.

I come to you this afternoon from the high plains of western Kansas, the area where I was born and raised, and where I have enjoyed nearly 20 years in the broadcasting business. I honestly feel that the knowledge I have gained about the broadcasting business through those nearly 20 years gives me the ability to continue in that

business in my area, providing I live up to the standards and good practices that specifically are stated in the license granted to me by my Government.

But now, I am faced with the threat that when that license comes up for renewal, I may lose it to someone who will offer promises, not proof, but promises that he will do the job of serving the public interest better than I have been able to do.

My station and market are small. I am located in a community of some 6,000 people and yet, the broadcasting business has been good to me and my company. There were not always profits, but there are now, and I submit to you that the reason that business is good is because the public interest has been, and is being served in the area in which our station is located. I can think of no other reason for the success of a small market operation such as ours. But still, a dark cloud is rearing its ugly head in the form of a "claim jumper" who will make the supreme effort to deprive me of this continued success. There are those who have said they stand against the Pastore bill because of the big buys and that the small market broadcaster such as myself does not have to worry because nobody wants his station license anyway. I believe there are small profitable stations in Kansas that these "claim jumpers" would like to have and will try to get at renewal time. Investments might be substantially smaller in a market my size. Building rental is a little cheaper. The smalltime "claim jumper" will have a field day attacking those stations which he knows have been profitable because it is a matter of public record. Others have perhaps said it much more eloquently than I will ever be able to say it. This business of the great expense in attorney's fees, hearings, rehearings, the general chaos created by the necessity of defense certainly these are vital issues, particularly in the small market areas such as mine. But I submit to you that there is an even more important issue, and that is the issue of morality. The system of American law enforcement was built on the premise that you are innocent until proven guilty. The broadcasters in this great Nation believe that that premise applies here that S. 2004 must be made law if the tradition of broadcast free enterprise is to grow and flourish. It is more than just protecting the broadcaster's investment-it is a matter of moral standing in our society, which was founded on the idea that a man has the right to pursue his chosen profession until those rights are violated.

I do not worry too much about my inability to defend my record of serving the public interest in Goodland, Kans. I apparently have been doing that for the past 10 years because I have a broadcast license posted in my control room that says so. But I do worry about the possibility of the indignity that may be shown me by someone who considers me fair game before I have a chance to stand on my record. Without orderly renewal procedures, my company will be faced with the constant prospect of losing that broadcast license to someone who has only to "promise" that he will try to do the job better. It seems to me that it is the very idea of these circumstances that strikes at the roots of free enterprise. I know of no other form of business in this country, government regulated or not, that is put at the mercy of those who offer nothing but promises, and stands to receive government approval for their efforts.

It would seem that the real tragedy here lies with those, particularly those in high government position, who actively solicit others to seek broadcast licenses at renewal time. In effect, they are preaching, "Go get that guy over there," or, if his record happens to have been good, "You might stand a better chance with that one over there--he probably hasn't the money to defend himself."

At this very moment, a so-called "school" has been, or is being planned to educate "claim-jumpers" on ways and means of taking over a broadcast license. These are the kind of people who would serve the public interest in Wheeling, W. Va., or Odessa, Tex., or Goodland, Kans. Today, they jeopardize the broadcasting industry. If their activities are not laid to rest, who can say where they may strike next?

We read a lot these days about how the passage of S. 2004 will grant a license in perpetuity in Newsweek, Time, and Harper's. Has anyone or any magazine or any newspaper explained to anyone's satisfaction other than their own how this will be? Have any of those who are against S. 2004 sat down and studied a license renewal form or taken the time to see what it takes to receive FCC approval to operate a broadcast station? I submit that if these people believe that licenses stand to be granted in perpetuity with the passage of S. 2004, that they do not know what they are talking about. And if the FCC seemingly follows this practice, perhaps it is because the vast majority of licensees are living up to the premise of serving the public interest.

Small market broadcasters in markets of 30,000 or smaller are the backbone of American broadcasting. I wish that they would not give us this idea about receiving my license in perpetuity now or after passage of S. 2004 because I know what I have to do to earn my license, and I am going to do everything I have to in order to keep it.

My father once told me when I was quite young there on the farm that there were very few goals that were unobtainable if I simply had the desire to work for them. He also told me that the American system, because of its democratic procedures, protected those who attained these goals, provided they did not violate the sacred trusts inherent in those procedures. My father may have been wrong. But I doubt it. Your support of S. 2004 will prove him right.

sir?

Senator PASTORE. Are you the sole owner of your station, Mr. MELIA. No, sir, I am a very small minority owner. Senator PASTORE. Í do not want to prod, I am just trying to get this in a dramatic way in the record. If you feel I am being personal in any way, you just tell me so and I shall not pursue it. What value would you put on your station?

Mr. MELIA. If we were to sell it on the market today?

Senator PASTORE. If you were to sell it freely on the market.

Mr. MELIA. I would guess $250,000.

Senator PASTORE. What if the license were taken away from you and you had to sell it at a forced sale because you no longer had the license. What would it be worth?

Mr. MELIA. I would assume we have in the neighborhood of $50,000 to $60,000 of equipment to be disposed of in one form or another. Senator PASTORE. So, naturally, most of your value is good will. Mr. MELIA. That is right, absolutely; no question about it. Senator PASTORE. Thank you very, very much.

Now we have a last witness here, Miss Julie Reed, but I want to make an announcement. We have a set of witnesses tomorrow, I think seven in number. We have four for Friday. That is the list of witnesses that we have. The record will be declared closed Friday after we hear the four witnesses that is, the hearings will come to a close but the record will be opened for 1 week for anyone who desires to submit a statement. The only other parties that will come before the committee thereafter, excepting those who submit statements for the record, will be the members of the FCC that we had to excuse because of lack of time and that we are calling back so we can hear from each one of the seven members.

STATEMENT OF MISS JULIE REED, FIGHT MEDICAL DELINQUENCY WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOW COMMITTEE, POST OFFICE BOX 103, BRONXVILLE, N.Y.

Miss REED. My name is Julie Reed. I am an ad hoc committee of one, which I call "Fight Medical Delinquency-Write Your Congressman NOW Committee," Post Office Box 103, Bronxville, N.Y., Zip Code 10708.

I thank you for hearing me, Senator Pastore.

Senator PASTORE. Thank you very much.

Miss REED. I am one of those little people, and I am one of those little people whose life has been stopped at a certain point, and I, in effect, laid aside my life to try to do something about a very, very bad situation in which I found myself. I found it necessary to try to articulate the problem of getting medical treatment in the United States. I found that one couldn't get medical treatment. One could get harmful medical treatment, violent medical treatment. One had no recourse at law, the courts protecting segments of our population. There was no recourse in Congress. There is no place to turn, no place.

I had always thought very, very highly of my country.

Senator PASTORE. Let me ask you this question, not that it may be related to this particular bill, but naturally I am interested because I get many, many letters from my own constituents on problems that you have just cited.

Could you be a little more specific?

Miss REED. Of course, and I intend to be.

I decided to examine why it was I had no remedy at law for almost losing my life.

Senator PASTORE. For almost what?

Miss REED. Losing my life in medical circumstances.

I live in the New York City area. This is commonplace where I am: "Unwanted patients die waiting." This is a news item out of the New York Daily News, March 21, 1968.

Senator PASTORE. Would you care to tell us, or is it a private matter, what your illness was, or is it a private thing?

Miss REED. Of course, all illness is very private and very personal. Senator PASTORE. Don't tell me if you think we are becoming indelicate on the subject. But I would like to find out what treatment you didn't get, what treatment you wanted, where you went, and what the stumbling block was.