DGJ sent this to me, looks like he was trying to inform the Senator that he was against S379. The response from our illustrious Senator suggests that his mind is made up, he is voting for it. Chambliss uses the argument that since satellite radio has to pay a special tax, why shouldn’t terrestrial. The correct answer Mr. Chambliss is, get rid of the tax on internet, satellite and cable companies.
My satellite bill showed up the other day and added $20.00 per unit tack on fee to cover this damned tax. Forty dollars I am paying to the government now, extra, for a service I chose to purchase when there was no such tax.The Chambliss argument is to screw all consumers.
We da the gubmit, and we need MO MONEY.
Should that be…We da the gubmit, and we need YO MONEY.
This is the email he received.
What a cop out of a response...
From: Saxby Chambliss [mailto:saxby_chambliss@chambliss.senate.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 10:04 AM
Subject: Responding to your message
Dear Mr. Johnson:
Thank you for contacting me regarding S. 379, the "Performance Rights Act." It is good to hear from you.
S. 379 was introduced on February 4, 2009, and was placed on the Senate calendar on October 15, 2009. Currently, internet, satellite, and cable radio stations are required to pay royalties for the music that they are playing. However, terrestrial radio stations are exempt from paying these royalties, and this legislation would end this exemption.
This bill would allow public radio stations and private radio stations with gross revenues of less than $1.2 million to elect to pay a flat fee per year in royalties for their broadcast transmissions. Religious organizations would continue to remain free from paying fees associated with royalties. Should this legislation come before the Senate, I will keep your views in mind.
If you would like to receive timely email alerts regarding the latest congressional actions and my weekly e-newsletter, please sign up via my web site at: www.chambliss.senate.gov . Please let me know whenever I may be of assistance.
Here is a response tot he same request, from Johnny Isakson. Different, a promise to support. We will see.
ReplyDeleteDear Mr. Johnson:
Thank you for contacting my office regarding S.379, the Performance Rights Act. I appreciate hearing from you and appreciate the opportunity to respond.
The Performance Rights Act was introduced by Senator Leahy (D-VT) and is currently pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee. This legislation would amend federal copyright law to grant performers of sound recordings equal rights to compensation from terrestrial broadcasters. Each terrestrial broadcaster would be charged a flat fee in lieu of payment of royalties dependent upon their gross revenues. Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) introduced S.Con.Res.14, a concurrent resolution supporting the Local Radio Freedom Act, which declares that Congress should not impose any new performance fee, tax or royalty. This legislation is currently pending before the Senate Committee on Commerce Science and Transportation. As a member of this committee, I look forward to supporting this resolution when it comes before me for a vote.
Thank you again for contacting me. Please visit my webpage at http://isakson.senate.gov/ for more information on the issues important to you and to sign up for my e-newsletter.
Sincerely,
Johnny Isakson
United States Senator
For future correspondence with my office, please visit my web site at http://isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm. You can also click here to sign up for the eNewsletter