Elementary concepts of fairness demand that musical artists and performers remain free to negotiate…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Congress Should Oppose the So-Called "Local Radio Freedom Act"

Elementary concepts of fairness demand that musical artists and performers remain free to negotiate performance rights with broadcasters that seek to play their songs.  Indeed, current law allows artists to mutually bargain with satellite, Internet and cable stations.

The only exception:  traditional AM-FM radio stations, which are unfairly protected by federal law from having to negotiate with artists for performance rights.  This is precisely the sort of crony capitalism against which the American electorate is increasingly irate.

Unfortunately, rather than advocating market reform, some in Congress wish to cement the current protectionist status quo.  Under the so-called "Local Radio Freedom Act," whose very name contradicts its real-world effect, terrestrial radio's unjustifiable…[more]

July 28, 2015 • 03:51 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Living Social(ist): Alerting America to Dumb Government Policies Print
By CFIF Staff
Thursday, September 02 2010

Act Now: Congress and Obama Want Preferential Tax Treatment for Foreign-Owned Energy Producers

CFIF has released a Living Social(ist): Bad Deal Alert, a new take on the trendy deal-of-the-day email coupon services exploding in popularity across the country. Instead of offering half-priced chocolate spa baths or $1 admissions to your local petting zoo, we highlight a truly foolish idea currently being considered by President Obama and Congress.

This particular "coupon" – which is being offered to foreign, mostly state-owned energy producers like Hugo Chavez’s Citgo – calls attention to a dubious new tax hike in the president’s proposed 2011 budget. It’s a great deal for foreign competitors as it would double-tax domestic oil and gas producers on money earned overseas, leaving foreign-owned companies with a competitive advantage in the marketplace. Plus, it comes with the added benefit of limiting America’s access to energy resources that fuel our economy, provide 9 million domestic jobs and ensure our access to affordable energy. 

[+] (enlarge)

We hope this humorous take on a serious issue will inspire readers to join CFIF in opposing this job-killing proposal.

Remember, by doing away with the credit for dual capacity taxes for America’s oil and gas industry, Congress and the president would effectively be handing jobs, revenue and investment to foreign and mostly state-owned oil companies in Venezuela, China and the Middle East. And it would reduce America’s energy independence and security, while raising energy prices for American families.   

Contact your representatives in Congress now. Tell them “NO” to preferential tax treatment for foreign oil, “NO” to changes in the dual capacity tax laws. 

And, please help us spread the word by sharing this with your friends, colleagues and family members.

Question of the Week   
Which one of the following became the nationwide symbol of support for the 52 Americans held hostage by the Islamic Republic of Iran for 444 days between 1979 and 1981?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"While in all probability Clinton remains the prohibitive favorite to win the nomination, it is true that her favorable ratings have taken a tumble. For over four years, from 2009 until well into 2013, Clinton's favorable ratings in the Gallup Poll were in the 60's, but a few months into 2013 they started a plunge down to 43 percent. Arguably, her favorable ratings were unsustainably high during her…[more]
 
 
—Charlie Cook, The Cook Political Report Editor and Publisher
— Charlie Cook, The Cook Political Report Editor and Publisher
 
Liberty Poll   

If the campaign for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination were only between Donald Trump and John McCain, for whom would you vote?