We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
July 17, 1946
SAYS BROADCASTERS "LAID AN EGG" BACKING ANTI-PETRILLO BILL
That the Lea Act, the so-called anti-Petrillo law, may prove a legislative boomerang, is the charge made by Senator Glen H. Taylor (D), of Idaho, one of the three members of the upper branch of Congress, who voted against the bill. The others were Senator George D. Aiken (r), of Vermont, and Senator Hugh B.
Mitchell (D), of Washington State.
Senator Taylor who is himself a product of the ether waves coming into fame over Idaho stations as the "Singing Radio Cowboy", apparently gets considerable satisfaction in his lonesome Petrillo position and in the fact that he believes the law will prove unconstitutional.
He is the same Senator Taylor who several weeks ago called on Attorney General Tom C. Clark to Investigate the radio manufact¬ uring industry which he charged is holding up the manufacture of FM sets. Senator Taylor charged that set manufacturers are planning to incorporate M in fewer than 10$ of the sets and asked if the manufacturers have conspired to withhold FM from consumers during 1946 and whether the delay in introducing FM is "due to the desire of manufacturers to sell 20 million out-dated AM (standard wave) receivers in 1946 in order to resell these 20 million consumers with modern receivers in a year or two. "
Discussing the Lea (anti-Petrillo Act), and stating that nothing gave him greater satisfaction and pride in retrospect than his negative vote on this legislation, Senator Taylor said:
"I debated the bill for 4 hours with the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Johnson), and I tried to convince my colleagues that the bill was unconstitutional, unworkable, and badly drafted, I consulted in advance with several students of labor and radio prob¬ lems, All of them told me that the bill was clearly unconstitution¬ al; but, as friends, they advised me not to take up the fight, petrillo*, they assured me, ’is the most unpopular man in the country today, and if you do not Join the pack and bark at him, you will miss a chance for acclaim from press and radio. Since the bill is obviously invalid, you might Just as well vote for it and leave it to the courts to throw it out. * I did not heed that warn¬ ing, much as I appreciated the kind spirit that prompted it. I do not think that Congress should legislate for the headlines, or re¬ flect the passions of the moment. I do not think we should enact unconstitutional legislation, and rely upon the courts to mop up after us. Upon Congress, as well as upon the Judiciary, rests the obligation of protecting the Constitution.
1