K. Communications Media (Title 47, United States Code)

47 U.S.C. § 312. Administrative Sanctions-Revocation of Station License or Construction Permit.

(a) The Commission may revoke any station license or construction permit

(7) for willful or repeated failure to allow reasonable access to or to permit purchase of reasonable amounts of time for the use of a broadcasting station by a legally qualified candidate for Federal elective office on behalf of his candidacy. (Sec. 312(a)(7) added by Pub. L. 92-225, Title I, § 103(a)(2)(A), Feb. 7, 1972, 86 Stat. 4; Oct. 15, 1974, Pub. L. 93–443, Title II, § 205(b), 88 Stat. 1278.)

47 U.S.C. § 315. Candidates for Public Office.

(a) Equal opportunities requirement; censorship prohibition; allowance of station use; news appearances exception; public interest; public issues discussion opportunities.

If any licensee shall permit any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office to use a broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities to all other such candidates for that office in the use of such broadcasting station: Provided, That such licensee shall have no power of censorship over the material broadcast under the provisions of this section. No obligation is imposed under this subsection upon any licensee to allow the use of its station by any such candidate. Appearance by a legally qualified candidate on any

(1) bona fide newscast,

(2) bona fide news interview,

(3) bona fide news documentary (if the appearance of the candidate is incidental to the presentation of the subject or subjects covered by the news documentary), or

(4) on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events (including but not limited to political conventions and activities incidental thereto),

shall not be deemed to be use of a broadcasting station within the meaning of this subsection. Nothing in the foregoing sentence shall be construed as relieving broadcasters, in connection with the presentation of newcasts, news interviews, news documentaries, and on-the-spot coverage of news events, from the obligation imposed upon them under this chapter to operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance.

(b) Broadcast media rates.

The charges made for the use of any broadcasting station by any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any

public office in connection with his campaign for nomination for election, or election, to such office shall not exceed(1) during the forty-five days preceding the date of a primary or primary runoff election and during the sixty days preceding the date of a general or special election in which such person is a candidate, the lowest unit charge of the station for the same class and amount of time for the same period; and

(2) at any other time, the charges made for comparable use of such station by other users thereof.

(1) the term "broadcasting station" includes a community antenna television system; and

(2) the terms "licensee" and "station licensee" when used with respect to a community antenna television system mean the operator of such system.

(d) Rules and regulations.

The Commission shall prescribe appropriate rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of this section.

(June 19, 1934, c.652, Title III, § 315, 48 Stat. 1088; July 16, 1952, c.879, § 11, 66 Stat. 717; Pub. L. 86-274, § 1, Sept. 14, 1959, 73 Stat. 557; Pub. L. 92-225, Title I, § 103(a)(1), (2)(B), 104(c), Feb. 7, 1972, 86 Stat. 4, 7; Pub. L. 93-443, Title IV, § 402, Oct. 15, 1974, 88 Stat. 1291).

PART II. NOMINATION OF THE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT

A. Background of The National Nominating Conventions, Presidential Primaries, and The Selection of Delegates

The United States Constitution does not authorize the establishment of political parties, and it does not prohibit their establishment. The Founding Fathers did not have a favorable attitude toward political parties and even saw them as possible threats to state government.1 When the new government was being formed, two competing parties developed, one of which favored the adoption of the Constitution and the other of which was against the adoption of the Constitution. The Federalist Party favored a strong central government and was comprised of merchants, shippers, and financiers, among others. The other party was comprised of members who were anti-federalist who opposed a strong central government and sought to preserve the sovereignty of the states.2

The Constitution does not provide for any formal nominating procedures for candidates for President and Vice President outside of those provisions relating to the Electoral College.3 With the advent of political parties, the inadequacies of the Electoral College system of electing a President and Vice President became manifested especially in regard to the nominating process.4

In the first presidential election in 1789, there were no formal nominations, and the Electoral College method for choosing a President and Vice President was used. In the presidential election of 1792, there was no attempt to challenge President Washington, but a political party by the name of the Democratic-Republicans unsuccessfully presented a challenge to Vice President Adams.5 The presidential election of 1796 was the first time that the congressional caucus was used as a nominating method. The congressional caucus system was used for nominating presidential candidates since there was a need for limiting the number of party candidates and for unifying the elections of a political

1National Party Conventions 1831-1976, Congressional Quarterly. Sept. 1979, Bibid

3W. Crotty. Presidential Nominating Procedures, History of Presidential Nomination Practices, v. 1, p. xiv, National Municipal League (1974). 4 Ibid.

5 National Party Conventions, supra at p. 2.

party. The caucus system of nominating presidential candidates had some serious limitations: (1) the nominating process did not include non-congressional persons; (2) state influence was limited according to the number of its congressmen and even to the party affiliations of the congressmen; and (3) Congress was a dominant force in presidential matters since the President would likely be more responsive to the Congressmen who nominated him than to the people."

Later state-based legislative systems of nominating Presidents which were used in the 1828 presidential election of Andrew Jackson eventually eliminated the congressional caucus method of nomination. By 1840 the major political parties began holding national conventions with delegates selected from the various states to nominate their candidates for President and Vice President. The national conventions provided for broader electoral participation in the presidential nominating process than the congressional caucus or state-based legislative systems. However, even the national conventions had their drawbacks. The delegate selection procedures varied from state to state; state party bosses and political machines often controlled the selection of delegates to the national nominating conventions.8

In 1968, the major political parties began to reform and democratize the delegate selection procedures to provide for greater participation by all voters affiliated with them, including such groups as blacks, youth, women, and minorities. In the Democratic Party, the McGovern-Fraser Commission was established and was mandated to draft a delegate plan that would be an "open" system of delegate selection that would insure every Democrat "a full, meaningful and timely" opportunity to participate, beginning with the 1972 Convention. The 1968 Republican National Convention established the Delegates and Organization Committee to make recommendations to achieve the broadest possible participation in the Party's affairs. The 1972 Republican Convention adopted five of the ten recommendations made by the Committee and incorporated them into the 1976 delegate selection rules. In both the Democratic and Republican parties, the state parties still exercise much power in the delegate selection procedures; however, the impetus that has been taken by the national parties for broader participation has provided for more due process in the selection and seating of national nominating convention delegates.9

In October, 1975, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) established a committee to study the problem of the presidential primaries and to review delegate selection rules of the Democratic Party.10 The Commission was chaired by Michigan State Chairman, Morley Winograd, and it became known as the Winograd Commission. It was composed of fifty-eight members. Among some of the major recommenda

8 Id., xv. See also E. McChesney Sait. American Parties And Elections, pp. 316-319, D. Appleton-Century Co. (New York 1939).

9 W. Crotty, supra at pp. xvii-xix.

10 National Party Conventions, supra, at p. 10-11.