70 Mr. METCALF, from the Joint Committee on Congressional Operations, submitted the following INTERIM REPORT SUMMARY Early in 1974, the Joint Committee on Congressional Operations held extensive hearings on Congress and Mass Communications toIdentify various ways, consistent with its lawmaking function, that Congress might more effectively communicate the meaning of its constitutional role and daily activities to the American people; and, Examine any customs or other facets of congressional operations that may have the effect of discouraging the news media or the public generally from seeing and understanding how Congress works. This interim report deals with only one aspect of our inquiry, the question of print and broadcast media coverage of the regular proceedings of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Our findings are based on testimony received in six days of hearings-in February, March, and April-supplemented by extensive staff research and inspection of the communications facilities and practices of other legislative bodies. Witnesses included Members of both Houses, public and commercial broadcasting executives, print and broadcast newsmen, State legislators, local broadcasters, experts in the field of communications law and technology, and broadcast industry representatives. Briefly stated, this testimony and supplementary study demonstrates that. The potential for bringing more information about congressional activities directly to more Americans through broadcast coverage of activities in the House and Senate Chambers is substantial; The experience of other legislatures which have permitted such coverage under varying conditions over the past several years has been generally favorable; and, . The technology of communications is sufficiently advanced to provide for televising or recording unobtrusively without disrupting floor proceedings. We recognize that the United States Congress is in many respects unique among legislative bodies, and what has been tried successfully in other legislatures may not be suited to the workings of this institution. Indeed, broadcast coverage of floor proceedings under even the best of conditions may have some undesirable consequences. We therefore recommend that Congress move forward with a carefully designed but limited test to determine the ultimate feasibility and desirability of a permanent system for broadcasting activities in the House and Senate Chambers. This test should be carried out in a non-partisan manner during the First Session of the 94th Congress. Responsibility for the direction of the test program can be assumed either by existing committees or by temporary committees created for this purpose. The Joint Committee on Congressional Operations is, of course, prepared and willing to conduct such a test, in consultation with the majority and minority leaders of both Houses. Similarly, it could be conducted independently in the two Houses-by the House, Committee on Rules and the House Committee on Administration, and the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration-with appropriate liaison. Or Select Committees on Broadcast Coverage might be established in each House, composed of representatives of the leadership and representation from the various committees which have jurisdiction in this area. The test program should include . First, a broadcast quality video feed, provided continuously while each House is in session, initially serving monitors in a limited number of House and Senate offices. After a trial period, this feed can be made available to commercial and public broadcasters for use live or delayed in news or public affairs programs as they see fit; Second, a broadcast quality audio feed, also provided continuously, initially carried into each congressional office. Again after a trial period, this feed can be made available for use by commercial and public broadcasters; and, Third, a running summary of floor debate, daily committee schedules, bill status and other relevant information, transmitted on teletype printers and made available for use in the news galleries, by the wire services and other media outlets, as well as for use by Members of both Houses. We also recommend that appropriate arrangements be made for evaluation of each phase of the test program-including its usefulness to Members for monitoring floor activities, the use of the audio and video feeds by broadcasters, and the response of the general public to broadcast coverage and that the committee or committees which conduct the test be directed to report on whether a permanent broadcasting system should be inaugurated prior to the beginning of the Bicentennial Year. INTRODUCTION: The Study of Congress and Mass Communications As Abraham Lincoln and a good many others have recognized, the ability to influence public opinion is directly related to the exercise of power in a democratic society. "In this and like communities," he once said, "public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment nothing can fail, without it nothing can succeed. Consequently, he who molds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions." This maxim has been largely unheeded, if not ignored, in the congressional response to the communications revolution of the Twentieth Century. In effect, Congress the "great commanding theater of the Nation"-has provided reserved seating only, even as all Americans have been invited to tour the White House, live and in color, and to sit in while the President signs a veto message or conducts a televised summit meeting on the economy. Whatever the reasons for its begrudging acceptance of changing communications practices and capabilities in the past, Congress must now actively seek ways to reach and inform more people through the mass media. For almost a decade, every reliable indicator of public opinion has disclosed evidence of increasing cynicism about the performance of most democratic institutions and distrust for the elected officials who serve in them. Except for the years when it was responding with alacrity to Presidential program initiatives, Congress has been included in this indictment. And the decline in public confidence has been precipitous. since 1968, the years of deepening, fundamental differences between Congress and a strong, determined President. The persistence and depth of public disenchantment obviously is not simply a product of public ignorance or a "bad press." Public attitudes at any particular time are a mix of many ingredients, including congressional shortcomings accurately perceived and the enactment of laws which, although they may benefit most, are seen to be unnecessary or undesirable by some. But unfamiliarity with and misinformation about this institutionits activities, structure, functions, and constitutional role-clearly are a factor. While Congress has its faults, as Vice Chairman Jack Brooks pointed out in opening remarks for the Joint Committee's Hearings, Congress "does move with reasonable speed-and a concern for the facts-and a serious desire to accommodate all or most all conflicting interests on any issue. Congress is a much more effective and responsible body than most people seem to believe." Some of the barriers to public comprehension of the Legislative Branch are inherent in its composition and structure, which also place it at a communications disadvantage relative to the Executive Branch. The voice of the Executive Branch, which has an awesome and continually growing capacity to project its views, can be orchestrated to some extent through the Office of the President. Congress, with 535 S.R. 1275 0 -2 |