OnTheIssuesLogo

Ben Chandler on Technology

Democratic Representative (KY-6)

 


Voted NO on terminating funding for National Public Radio.

    Congressional Summary: To prohibit Federal funding of National Public Radio and the use of Federal funds to acquire radio content, including:
  1. broadcasting, transmitting, and programming over noncommercial educational radio broadcast Corporation for Public Broadcasting was created in 1967. Today, we have multiple listening choices; NPR [has become an] absurd anachronism. It is time to move forward and to let National Public Radio spread its wings and support itself.

    Opponent's Argument for voting No:
    [Rep. Waxman, D-CA]: This bill will cripple National Public Radio, public radio stations, and programming that is vital to over 27 million Americans. We are now voting to deny the public access to one of our Nation's most credible sources of news coverage. This bill does not save a penny. This legislation does not serve any fiscal purpose, but it does serve an ugly ideological one. This legislation is not about reforming NPR. It is about punishing NPR. It is vindictive, it is mean-spirited, it is going to hit the smallest stations in rural areas particularly hard. Public radio is indispensable for access to news that's hard to get, especially where broadband service is limited.

    Reference: Prohibit Federal Funds for NPR; Bill H.1076 ; vote number 11-HV192 on Mar 17, 2011

    Voted YES on delaying digital TV conversion by four months.

    Congressional Summary:Amends the Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act to delay the transition of television broadcasting from analog to digital to June 13, 2009. Requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to extend for a 116-day period the licenses for recovered spectrum, including the construction requirements associated with those licenses.

    Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. RICK BOUCHER (D, VA-9): Fully 6.5 million households are totally unprepared for the transition on February 17; these 6.5 million households will lose all of their television service, and that number represents about 5.7% of the total American television viewing public. If almost 6%of the nation's households lose all of their television service, I think that most people would declare that the digital television transition has been a failure. In recognition of that reality, this legislation would delay the transition until June 12.

    Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. JOE LINUS BARTON (R, TX-6): The majority is trying to fix a problem that I do not think really exists. We have sent out 33 million coupons: 22 million of those coupons have been redeemed, and 11 million coupons are outstanding. The outstanding coupons are being redeemed, I think, by about 500,000 a week, something like that. In my opinion, you could keep the hard date and not have a problem, but if you think there is a problem, it is not from lack of money. We have appropriated $1.3 billion. About half of that is still in the Treasury, so the redemption rate is only about 52%. Even though we are delaying this until June 12 if this bill becomes law, according to the acting chairman of the FCC, 61% of the television stations in America are going to go ahead and convert to digital. 143 television stations already have converted, and in those areas where they have converted, I am not aware that there has been a huge problem.

    Reference: DTV Delay Act; Bill S.352 ; vote number 2009-H052 on Mar 4, 2009

    Voted YES on retroactive immunity for telecoms' warrantless surveillance.

    Proponents argument for voting YEA: Rep. ETHERIDGE. This bipartisan bill provides the critical tools that our intelligence community needs to ensure the safety of our Nation--to authorize surveillance in the case of an emergency situation, provided that they return to the FISA court within 7 days to apply for a warrant.

    Rep. LANGEVIN. One issue that has been repeatedly addressed is whether telecommunications companies should be granted immunity against pending lawsuits for their involvement in the earlier surveillance program. This legislation preserves a role for the U.S. court system to decide independently whether the telecommunications companies acted in good faith. Only after that review would the courts decide whether the telecommunications companies deserve any form of liability protection.

    Opponents argument for voting NAY: Rep. LEVIN. I oppose this bill because of the provisions that would confer retroactive immunity on the telecommunications companies that participated in the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program. It sets a dangerous precedent for Congress to approve a law that dismisses ongoing court cases simply on the basis that the companies can show that the administration told them that its warrantless surveillance program was legal. A program is not legal just because the administration claims that it is.

    Rep. NADLER. The House must decide today whether to uphold the rule of law & the supremacy of the Constitution or whether to protect & reward the lawless behavior of the administration and of the telecommunications companies that participated in its clearly illegal program of spying on innocent Americans. The bill is a fig-leaf, granting blanket immunity to the telecom companies for illegal acts. It denies people whose rights were violated their fair day in court, and it denies the American people their right to have the actions of the administration subjected to fair & independent scrutiny.

    Reference: FISA Amendments Act; Bill HR6304 ; vote number 2008-437 on Jun 20, 2008

    Voted YES on establishing "network neutrality" (non-tiered Internet).

    An amendment, sponsored by Rep Markey (D, MA) which establishes "network neutrality" by requiring that broadband network service providers have the following duties:
    1. not to block or interfere with the ability of any person to use a broadband connection to access the Internet;
    2. to operate its broadband network in a nondiscriminatory manner so that any person can offer or provide content and services over the broadband network with equivalent or better capability than the provider extends to itself or affiliated parties, and without the imposition of a charge for such nondiscriminatory network operation;
    3. if the provider prioritizes or offers enhanced quality of service to data of a particular type, to prioritize or offer enhanced quality of service to all data of that type without imposing a surcharge or other consideration for such prioritization or enhanced quality of service.
    Proponents say that network neutrality ensures that everybody is treated alike with regard to use of the Internet, which has been a principle applied to Internet use since it was first originated. Proponents say that without network neutrality, large corporations will pay for exclusive preferential service and hence small websites will be relegated to a second tier of inferior service. Opponents say that the Markey amendment forsakes the free market in favor of government price controls, and would chill investment in broadband network and deployment of new broadband services, and would reduce choice for internet users. Voting YES favors the network neutrality viewpoint over the price control viewpoint.
    Reference: Communications, Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act; Bill HR 5252 Amendment 987 ; vote number 2006-239 on Jun 8, 2006

    Voted YES on increasing fines for indecent broadcasting.

    Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005: Expresses the sense of Congress that broadcast television station licensees should reinstitute a family viewing policy for broadcasters. Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to provide that for violators of any Federal Communications Commission (FCC) license, if a violator is determined by the FCC to have broadcast obscene, indecent, or profane material, the amount of forfeiture penalty shall not exceed $500,000 for each violation. Sets forth:
    1. additional factors for determining indecency penalties;
    2. indecency penalties for non-licensees;
    3. deadlines for actions on complaints;
    4. additional remedies for indecent broadcasts; and
    5. provisions for license disqualification, revocation, or renewal consideration for violations of indecency prohibitions.
    Reference: Bill sponsored by Rep. Fred Upton [R, MI-6]; Bill H.R.310 ; vote number 2005-035 on Feb 16, 2005

    Voted NO on promoting commercial human space flight industry.

    Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004: States that Congress finds that:
    1. the goal of safely opening space to the American people and to their private commercial enterprises should guide Federal space investments, policies, and regulations;
    2. private industry has begun to develop commercial launch vehicles capable of carrying human beings into space;
    3. greater private investment in these efforts will stimulate the commercial space transportation industry;
    4. space transportation is inherently risky, and the future of the commercial human space flight industry will depend on its ability to continually improve its safety performance; and
    5. the regulatory standards governing human space flight must evolve as the industry matures so that regulations neither stifle technology development nor expose crew or space flight participants to avoidable risks as the public comes to expect greater safety for crew and space flight participants from the industry.
    Reference: Bill sponsored by Rep Dana Rohrabacher [R, CA-46]; Bill H.R.5382 ; vote number 2004-541 on Nov 20, 2004

    Chief information officer to digitize federal government.

    Chandler adopted the manifesto, "A New Agenda for the New Decade":

    Performance-Based Government
    The strong anti-government sentiments of the early 1990s have subsided, but most Americans still think government is too bureaucratic, too centralized, and too inefficient.

    In Washington and around the country, a second round of “reinventing government” initiatives should be launched to transform public agencies into performance-based organizations focused on bottom-line results. Many public services can be delivered on a competitive basis among public and private entities with accountability for results. Public-private partnerships should become the rule, not the exception, in delivering services. Civic and voluntary groups, including faith-based organizations, should play a larger role in addressing America’s social problems.

    When the federal government provides grants to states and localities to perform public services, it should give the broadest possible administrative flexibility while demanding and rewarding specific results. Government information and services at every level should be thoroughly “digitized,” enabling citizens to conduct business with public agencies online.

    Source: The Hyde Park Declaration 00-DLC8 on Aug 1, 2000

    Facilitate nationwide 2-1-1 phone line for human services.

    Chandler co-sponsored facilitating nationwide 2-1-1 phone line for human services

    A bill to facilitate nationwide availability of 2-1-1 telephone service for information and referral on human services & volunteer services. Congress makes the following findings:

    1. The FCC has assigned 2-1-1 as the national telephone number for information and referral on human services.
    2. 2-1-1 facilitates critical connections between families seeking services, including community-based and faith-based organizations.
    3. There are approximately 1,500,000 nonprofit organizations in the US [which would be listed in the 2-1-1 service].
    4. Government funding supports well-intentioned programs that are not fully utilized because of a lack of access to such programs.
    5. A national cost-benefit analysis estimates a net value to society of a national 2-1-1 system approaching $130,000,000 in the first year alone.
    6. While 69% of the population has access to 2-1-1 telephone service from a land line in 41 States, inadequate funding prevents access to that telephone service throughout each of the States.
    7. 2-1-1 telephone service facilitates the availability of a single repository where comprehensive data on all community services is collected & maintained.

    Introductory statement by Sponsor:

    Sen. CLINTON: In the immediate aftermath of the devastation of September 11, most people did not know where to turn for information about their loved ones. Fortunately for those who knew about it, 2-1-1 was already operating in Connecticut, and it was critical in helping identify the whereabouts of victims, connecting frightened children with their parents, providing information on terrorist suspects, and linking ready volunteers with victims.

    Every single American should have a number they can call to cut through the chaos of an emergency. That number is 2-1-1. It's time to make our citizens and our country safer by making this resource available nationwide.

    Source: Calling for 2-1-1 Act (S.211 and H.R.211) 07-HR211 on Jan 9, 2007

    Popularize Electronic Signatures with ESIGN Day.

    Chandler signed H.CON.RES.290 & S.RES.576

      Now, therefore, be it Resolved that Congress supports the designation of a 'National ESIGN Day';
    1. recognizes the previous contribution made by Congress to the adoption of modern solutions that keep the United States on the leading technological edge; and
    2. reaffirms its commitment to facilitating interstate and foreign commerce in an increasingly digital world.
    Source: National ESIGN Day 10-HR290 on Jun 24, 2010

    No performance royalties for radio music.

    Chandler signed Local Radio Freedom Act

    Source: SCR.14&HCR.49 2009-SCR14 on Mar 30, 2009

    Other governors on Technology: Ben Chandler on other issues:
    KY Gubernatorial:
    Adam Edelen
    Alison Grimes
    Andy Beshear
    Elaine Chao
    Jim Gray
    Matt Bevin
    Robert Goforth
    Rocky Adkins
    KY Senatorial:
    Amy McGrath
    C. Wesley Morgan
    Jim Gray
    Mary Ann Tobin
    Mitch McConnell
    Rand Paul
    Steven Cox

    Gubernatorial Debates 2019:
    KY:
    Bevin(R) vs.Goforth(R,lost primary) vs.Adkins(D,lost primary) vs.Beshear(D) vs.Edelen(D,lost primary)
    LA:
    Edwards(D) vs.Rispone(R) vs.Abraham(R) vs.Kennedy(R,declined)
    MS:
    Bryant(R,retiring) vs.Foster(R) vs.Hood(D) vs.Reeves(R) vs.Waller(R)

    Gubernatorial Debates 2021:
    NJ:
    Murphy(D) vs.Ciattarelli(R)
    VA:
    Northam(D,term-limited) vs.Herring(D)

    Gubernatorial Debates 2020:
    DE: vs.Carney(incumbent) vs.Williams(D)
    IN: vs.Holcomb(incumbent) vs.Melton(D) vs.Woody Myers(D)
    MO: Parson(incumbent) vs.Nicole Galloway(D) vs.Jim Neely(R)
    MT: Bullock(retiring) vs.Fox(R) vs.Perry(R) vs.Gianforte(R) vs.Stapleton(R) vs.Olszewski(R) vs.Neill(D) vs.Schreiner(D) vs.Cooney(D) vs.Williams(D)
    NC: Cooper(incumbent) vs.Forest(R) vs.Holly Grange(R)
    ND: Burgum(incumbent) vs.Michael Coachman(R)
    NH: Sununu(incumbent) vs.Volinksy(D) vs.Dan Feltes(D)
    PR: Rossello(D;resigned) vs.Wanda Vazquez Garced(D)
    UT: Herbert(retiring) vs.Huntsman(R) vs.Cox(R) vs.Jeff Burningham(R)
    VT: Scott(incumbent) vs.Rebecca Holcombe(D) vs.Zuckerman(D)
    WA: Inslee(incumbent) vs.Bryant(R) vs.Fortunato(R)
    WV: Justice(incumbent) vs.Folk(R) vs.Thrasher(R) vs.Vanover(D) vs.Smith(D) vs.Ron Stollings(D)
    Abortion
    Budget/Economy
    Civil Rights
    Corporations
    Crime
    Drugs
    Education
    Energy/Oil
    Environment
    Families/Children
    Foreign Policy
    Free Trade
    Govt. Reform
    Gun Control
    Health Care
    Homeland Security
    Immigration
    Infrastructure/Technology
    Jobs
    Local Issues
    Principles/Values
    Social Security
    Tax Reform
    War/Iraq/Mideast
    Welfare/Poverty


    Contact info:
    Email Contact Form
    Fax Number:
    202-225-2122
    Mailing Address:
    Longworth HOB 1504, Washington, DC 20515
    Phone number:
    (202) 225-4706





    Page last updated: Apr 15, 2020