SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
September, 16 2009, 02:05pm EDT
Contact:
Moira Vahey, Free Press, (202) 265-1490, x 31
Public Interest and Civil Rights Groups Speak Out Against Unfounded Attacks on Mark Lloyd
More than 50 organizations call on the FCC and Congress to support the work of the FCC diversity officer and to correct the record on localism and diversity policies
WASHINGTON
On Wednesday, more than 50 civil rights, public interest and
grassroots organizations sent a letter to the Federal Communications
Commission and congressional leaders supporting Mark Lloyd, the
associate general counsel and chief diversity officer of the FCC, and
the agency's longstanding mission to promote localism, diversity and
competition in the media.
In recent weeks, Mr. Lloyd has been unfairly attacked on cable TV
and radio talk shows with false and misleading information about his
role and responsibilities at the FCC. A respected scholar and public
servant, Lloyd was hired by the agency to expand media opportunities
for women, people of color, small businesses, and those living in rural
areas.
The full text of the letter and a list of signatories is below:
September 16, 2009
To: FCC Commissioners and Congressional Leaders
We, the undersigned, ask you to speak out against the falsehoods and
misinformation that are threatening to derail important work by
Congress and the Federal Communications Commission on media and
technology policies that would benefit all Americans.
In recent weeks, Mark Lloyd, the associate general counsel and chief
diversity officer of the FCC, has come under attack by prominent cable
TV and radio hosts, and even by some members of Congress, who have made
false and misleading claims about his work at the agency.
Mr. Lloyd is a respected historian, an experienced civil rights
leader, and a dedicated public servant. He was hired by the FCC to
"collaborate on the policies and legal framework necessary to expand
opportunities for women, minorities, and small businesses to
participate in the communications marketplace." His important work
should not be hindered by lies and innuendo.
As the leading media policymakers in Washington, we ask you to speak
out against these unfounded attacks, stand publicly behind Mr. Lloyd,
and make clear your commitment to carrying out the core mandate of the
FCC -- as enshrined in the Communications Act of 1934 -- to promote
localism, diversity and competition in the media.
Let us be clear as to what "localism" actually means. Broadcasters
get hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of subsidies in exchange for
a basic commitment to serve the public interest. Broadcasters are
expected to be responsive to their local communities. Localism has been
a cornerstone of broadcast regulation as long as there has been
broadcast regulation. It has nothing to do with censorship or
interference with local programming decisions. Localism is simply about
public service, not about any political viewpoint. Local public service
programming and political talk radio, whether liberal or conservative,
are not mutually exclusive.
Likewise, as the Supreme Court has recognized, "Safeguarding the
public's right to receive a diversity of views and information over the
airwaves is ... an integral component of the FCC's mission." Diversity
of media ownership is a crucial issue, and the agency must address the
fact that women and people of color are vastly underrepresented among
media owners using the public airwaves.
But diversity is also about closing the digital divide: People of
color, the poor, and rural Americans are far less likely to have
high-speed Internet access at home or share in the benefits of
broadband. Diversity is about creating opportunities and broadening
participation; it should go without saying, but it has absolutely
nothing to do with censorship.
The third tenet of the FCC's mission is competition. Those using
their media megaphones to slander and distort the views of Mr. Lloyd
and others may not want competition. But the FCC's job, in its own
words, is "to strengthen the diverse and robust marketplace of ideas
that is essential to our democracy." The overriding goal must be more
speech, not less -- more radio stations, more cable channels and more
Web sites.
At the core of President Obama's media and technology agenda is a
commitment to "diversity in the ownership of broadcast media" and a
pledge to "promote the development of new media outlets for expression
of diverse viewpoints." Now is the time to further that agenda, not to
retreat from it.
We ask you, as leaders on these key media issues, to draw a line in
the sand now, speak out against the unfounded attacks, and redouble
your efforts to enact a policy agenda that will strengthen our economy,
our society and our democracy.
Sincerely,
Josh Silver
Free Press
Wade Henderson
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
Winnie Stachelberg
Center for American Progress
James Rucker
ColorOfChange.org
Stephanie Jones
National Urban League Policy Institute
Brent Wilkes
League of United Latin American Citizens
Larry Cohen
Communications Workers of America
Alex Nogales
National Hispanic Media Coalition
Bernie Lunzer
The Newspaper Guild
Communications Workers of America
Kimberly Marcus
Rainbow PUSH Coalition's Public Policy Institute
Malkia Cyril
Center for Media Justice
Andrew Schwartzman
Media Access Project
John Kosinski
Writers Guild of America West
Sandy Close
New America Media
Amalia Deloney
Media Action Grassroots Network
Angelo Falcon
National Institute for Latino Policy
Michael Calabrese
New America Foundation
Gigi Sohn
Public Knowledge
Rinku Sen
Applied Research Center
John Clark
National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians
Communications Workers of America
Graciela Sanchez
Esperanza Peace and Justice Center
Mimi Pickering
Appalshop
Steven Renderos
Main Street Project
Hal Ponder
American Federation of Musicians
Tracy Rosenberg
Media Alliance
Terry O'Neill
National Organization for Women
Roger Hickey
Campaign for America's Future
Andrea Quijada
New Mexico Media Literacy Project
Jonathan Lawson
Reclaim the Media
DeAnne Cuellar
Texas Media Empowerment Project
Chris Rabb
Afro-Netizen
Loris Ann Taylor
Lisa Fager
Bediako
Industry Ears
O. Ricardo Pimentel
National Association of Hispanic Journalists
Todd Wolfson
Media Mobilizing Project
Erica Williams
Campus Progress
Gary Flowers
Black Leadership Forum
Eva Paterson
Equal Justice Society
Rev. Lennox Yearwood, Jr
Hip Hop Caucus
Cheryl Contee
Jack and Jill Politics
Dr. E. Faye Williams
National Congress of Black Women
Emily Sheketoff
American Library Association
Ari Rabin-Havt
Media Matters Action Network
Kathryn Galan
National Association of Latino Independent Producers
Roberto Lovato
Presente
Joshua Breitbart
People's Production House
Karen Bond
National Black Coalition for Media Justice
Tracy Van Slyke
Media Consortium
Shireen Mitchell
Digital Sisters, Inc
Media and Technology Task Force
National Council of Women's Organizations
Ariel Dougherty
Media Equity Collaborative
Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. We believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
(202) 265-1490LATEST NEWS
Senate GOP Kills Bill That Would've Reversed $10 Billion Trump Corporate Tax Break
Sen. Ron Wyden called the tax giveaway "indefensible at a time when so many Americans are getting battered by inflation and barely staying afloat."
Feb 10, 2026
Nearly all US Senate Republicans on Tuesday voted to block a resolution that would have reversed a Trump administration regulatory change set to give some of the country's richest companies a $10.3 billion tax break.
The Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution was spearheaded by Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Angus King (I-Maine). The vote on whether to advance it was 47-51. The only Republican to vote in favor was the other Mainer, Susan Collins, who just confirmed she is running for another term, despite two strong Democratic challengers.
In a statement after the vote, Wyden tied the target of his resolution—an Internal Revenue Service guidance undermining the corporate alternative minimum tax (CAMT)—to the sweeping budget package that GOP lawmakers passed and President Donald Trump signed last summer, which also featured significant tax breaks for the rich.
"The ink is barely dry on the megabill Trump and Republicans passed to give $1 trillion in new tax breaks to giant corporations, and now his Treasury Department is throwing another $10 billion handout to the most profitable corporations in America," Wyden said.
"The pattern we're seeing is that the Trump administration gives big corporations and ultrawealthy donors whatever tax benefits they want the second they walk through the door at the Treasury Department, but that doesn't mean the Senate has to allow this giveaway to happen," he stressed. "Stuffing $10 billion into the coffers of corporations that are already raking in enormous profits is indefensible at a time when so many Americans are getting battered by inflation and barely staying afloat."
King similarly declared that "it's downright unfair to give billions in tax relief to America's most successful corporations when Maine people are struggling to afford their prescription drugs, childcare, and groceries." He described their resolution as "a commonsense step toward a fairer tax policy that prioritizes people over profits and levels the playing field."
Although the defeat was predictable, economic justice advocates lambasted Senate Republicans for killing the resolution.
Americans for Tax Fairness executive director David Kass said in a statement that "after passing historic tax giveaways for billionaires and big business through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBA), blowing up the deficit, and cutting billions from critical healthcare and nutrition programs to pay for it, Trump and his GOP allies in the Senate are taking every opportunity to ensure economic elites can avoid paying their fair share."
"This guidance would effectively circumvent Congress and create numerous opportunities for corporate tax evasion while increasing the deficit and national debt, thus creating more imbalance in a tax code that already favors the wealthy and large corporations," Kass said. "Sen. Wyden is right to lead the charge to stop this guidance—average Americans should not be forced to subsidize some of the most profitable companies on Earth."
Like the Senate, the House of Representatives is also narrowly controlled by the GOP. Matt Gardner, a senior fellow at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, noted in a Tuesday blog post that "even if lawmakers of both parties had sufficient backbone to retake the legislative power that the executive branch has usurped, President Trump would veto such a bill."
"But as a matter of educating lawmakers and the public, the recently rejected measure was a success given that tax legislation (such as this resolution) up for a vote in Congress usually gets an official budget score from Congress' revenue estimators at the Joint Committee on Taxation," he wrote. "And in this case, that reveals that this unilateral corporate tax cut from the Trump administration will cost $10 billion over a decade unless it is reversed."
"The Senate's failure to ratify Wyden's resolution may be only the opening salvo for members of Congress who want to retake the power given them under the Constitution to make tax law," Gardner suggested. "The regulation in question is not the first, and surely not the last, attempt by President Trump to unilaterally cut corporate taxes."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Khanna Names 6 Men 'Likely Incriminated' by Epstein Files That 'DOJ Hid for No Apparent Reason'
“The reality is that Donald Trump’s FBI scrubbed these files in March, long before Thomas Massie and I passed the Epstein Transparency Act," said the California progressive.
Feb 10, 2026
Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna on Tuesday read aloud on the House floor the names of half a dozen men he said are "likely incriminated" in files concerning Jeffrey Epstein, the late convicted child sex criminal and former friend of President Donald Trump.
“Yesterday, Congressman [Thomas] Massie [R-Ky.] and I went to the Department of Justice to read the unredacted Epstein files," Khanna (Calif.) said. "We spent about two hours there, and we learned that 70 to 80% of the files are still redacted."
"In fact, there were six wealthy, powerful men that the DOJ hid for no apparent reason,” the congressman continued. “When Congressman Massie and I pointed this out to the DOJ, they acknowledged their mistake, and now they have revealed the identity of these six powerful men."
“These men are: Salvatore Nuara; Zurab Mikeladze; Leonic Leonov; Nicola Caputo; Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, CEO of Dubai Ports World; and billionaire businessman Leslie Wexner, who was labeled as a ‘co-conspirator,’ by the FBI.” Khanna said.
“Now my question is: Why did it take Thomas Massie and me going to the Justice Department to get these six men’s identities to become public?" Khanna asked. "And if we found six men that they were hiding in two hours, imagine how many men they are covering up for in those three million files.”
Last year, Congress passed Khanna and Massie's Epstein Files Transparency Act, which required the public release of all relevant documents within 30 days. The legislation also empowered Attorney General Pam Bondi to redact large amounts of information that critics fear could include material that incriminates Trump, who Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said Tuesday is mentioned "more than a million times" in the unredacted Epstein files.
Democratic lawmakers and Massie have accused the DOJ of violating the law by incomplete disclosure and blowing the legal deadline for publishing the documents.
Major update: Trump mentioned in the “unredacted” Epstein Files more than one million times.FBI scrubbed files before giving them to the DOJ, so many “unredacted” files remain redacted.Khanna reads the names of six men on the House floorHead of Ohio State gynecology received money from Epstein
[image or embed]
— Aaron Parnas (@aaronparnas.bsky.social) February 10, 2026 at 11:13 AM
“The story gets worse,” Khanna said Tuesday. “The reality is that Donald Trump’s FBI scrubbed these files in March, long before Thomas Massie and I passed the Epstein Transparency Act... That means the survivors’ statement to the FBI naming rich and powerful men who went to Epstein’s island... they’re all hidden.”
None of the six named men had responded to Khanna's action as of late Tuesday afternoon. A legal representative for Wexner previously told the Associated Press that prosecutors had informed the 88-year-old billionaire that he was “neither a co-conspirator nor a target in any respect,” and that he cooperated with investigators.
The names of the six men were entered into the Congressional Record as part of Khanna's remarks. Inclusion in the Epstein files does not by itself prove or even imply any criminal wrongdoing.
“It’s time to begin with accountability for the Epstein class," Khanna said during his remarks Tuesday. "Hold them in front of Congress, those people who visited the island or did business with Epstein after he was a convicted pedophile. Investigate them. Prosecute them. And let us return to democratic accountability in the United States of America."
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Another Boat Bombing, House Progressives Demand End to 'Donroe Doctrine'
"We need to finally leave the Monroe Doctrine behind and pursue a foreign policy grounded in mutual respect and shared prosperity," said Rep. Nydia Velázquez, introducing the New Good Neighbor Act with Rep. Delia Ramirez.
Feb 10, 2026
With the death toll from President Donald Trump's boat bombings of alleged drug traffickers now at 130 after a Monday strike, a pair of progressive congresswomen on Tuesday called for ending the Monroe Doctrine and establishing a "New Good Neighbor" policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean.
In 1823, then-President James Monroe "declared the Western Hemisphere off limits to powerful countries in Europe," NPR noted last month. "Fast forward, and President Trump is reviving the Monroe Doctrine to justify intervening in places like Venezuela, and threatening further action in other parts of Latin America and Greenland."
Trump's version of the policy has been dubbed the "Donroe Doctrine." After US forces boarded the Aquila II, a Venezuela-linked oil tanker, in the Indian Ocean, David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International, said Monday that "the Donroe Doctrine is not simply a vision for the hemisphere. It is a doctrine of global domination."
In response to the president's recent actions—from his boat bombings and pardon of convicted drug trafficker and former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, to his oil blockade of Venezuela and raid that overthrew the South American country's president, Nicolás Maduro—US Reps. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) and Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) introduced the New Good Neighbor Act.
"This administration's aggressive stance toward Latin America makes this resolution critical," said Velázquez in a statement. "Their 'Donroe Doctrine' is simply a more grotesque version of the interventionist policies that have failed us for two centuries."
"The United States and Latin America face shared challenges in drug trafficking, migration, and climate change," she continued. "We can only solve these through real partnership, not coercion. We need to finally leave the Monroe Doctrine behind and pursue a foreign policy grounded in mutual respect and shared prosperity."
Ramirez similarly said that "for more than 200 years, the United States has used the Monroe Doctrine to justify a paternalistic, damaging approach to relations with Latin America and the Caribbean. As a result, the legacy of our nation's foreign policy in those regions is political instability, deep poverty, extreme migration, and colonialism. It is well past time we change our approach."
"We must recognize our interconnectedness and admit that the Monroe Doctrine undermines the partnership needed to confront the complex challenges of this century," she argued. "We must become better neighbors. That is why I am proud to join Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez to develop an approach to foreign policy that advances our collective interests and builds a stronger coalition throughout the Americas and the rest of the world."
The original Good Neighbor Policy was adopted by former President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s, in an attempt at reverse US imperialism in Latin America. The aim was to curb military interventions, center respect for national sovereignty, and prioritize diplomacy and trade.
As the sponsors' offices summarized, the new resolution calls for:
- The Department of State to formally confirm that the Monroe Doctrine is no longer a part of United States policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean;
- The federal government to develop a "New Good Neighbor" policy in place of the Monroe Doctrine;
- Developing a new approach to promoting economic development;
- The termination of all unilateral economic sanctions imposed through executive orders, and working with Congress to terminate all unilateral sanctions, such as the Cuba embargo, mandated by law;
- New legislation to trigger the suspension of assistance to a government whenever there is an extraconstitutional transfer of power;
- Prompt declassification of all United States government archives that relate to past coups d’état, dictatorships, and periods in the history of Latin American and Caribbean countries characterized by a high rate of human rights crimes perpetrated by security forces;
- Collaboration with Latin American and Caribbean governments on a far-reaching reform to the Organization of American States; and
- Supporting democratic reforms to the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, and other international financial institutions.
The measure isn't likely to advance in a Republican-controlled Congress that has failed to pass various war powers resolutions that would rein in Trump's boat strikes and aggression toward Venezuela, but it offers Democrats an opportunity to make their foreign policy positions clear going into the midterms—in which Velázquez, who is 72, has decided not to seek reelection.
So far, it is backed by Democratic Reps. Greg Casar (Texas), Yvette Clarke (NY), Jesús "Chuy" García (Ill.), Sylvia García (Texas), Adelita Grijalva (Ariz.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Jonathan Jackson (Ill.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), Summer Lee (Pa.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Lateefah Simon (Calif.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.). Like Velázquez, Chuy García and Schakowsky are also retiring after this term.
Leaders from organizations including the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), the United Methodist Church's board, and We Are CASA also backed the bill and commended the sponsors for, as Cavan Kharrazian of Demand Progress, put it "advancing a new framework for US engagement in the region grounded in mutual respect, sovereignty, and cooperation rather than coercion or threats."
Alex Main, CEPR's director of international policy, stressed that "Trump is waging a new offensive against Latin America and the Caribbean—conducting illegal and unprovoked military attacks and extrajudicial killings and brazenly intervening in other countries' domestic affairs in an undisguised effort to exert control over the region's resources and politics."
"But while Trump’s actions are especially egregious, they are just the latest chapter of a centuries-old story of US military political and economic interference that has subverted democracy and fueled instability and human rights crimes across the hemisphere," Main continued. "It is in the interest of the US to reject this doctrine of unilateral domination and chart a new course for US-Latin American relations—to treat our Latin American siblings as vecinos, not vassals."
Sharing yet another brief black-and-white video on social media, US Southern Command on Monday announced a "lethal kinetic strike on a vessel" allegedly "transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific." SOUTHCOM added that "two narco-terrorists were killed and one survived the strike," which prompted a search for the survivor.
Legal experts and various members of Congress have described the killings as murder on the high seas. Reiterating that position in response to the latest bombing disclosure, Amnesty International USA urged Americans to pressure lawmakers to act.
"US military helpfully publishes evidence of its mass murder of civilians at sea," said Ben Saul, a professor at Australia's University of Sydney and the United Nations special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. "Over to you, US Department of Justice, to do your job and bring murder suspects to justice."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular