FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                    News Media Contact:
September 18, 2000                                                                       David Fiske (202) 418-0513
                                
          Statement of FCC Chairman William E. Kennard
Concerning his Participation in the Personal Attack and Political Editorial Rule Proceeding
                                
Some time ago, I asked our Designated Agency Ethics Officer (DAEO) whether I should
recuse myself from the FCC proceeding reviewing the FCC Personal Attack and Political Editorial
rules because I had participated in it in the early 1980s on behalf of the National Association of
Broadcasters (NAB).  I was advised that there is no statute or rule prohibiting my participation,
but that a regulation issued by the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), applicable to all federal
employees, directs an employee to consider whether there are circumstances that "would raise a
question regarding his impartiality."  5 C.F.R.  2635.502(a).  Various factors are considered in
determining whether a reasonable person would question a federal employee's impartiality, and
our DAEO concluded, under the facts of this case, that a reasonable person would not seriously
question my impartiality, particularly because of the length of time that has passed since I worked
for NAB and the fact that I have no personal financial stake in the matter.  Nevertheless, out of an
abundance of caution, I decided not to participate.

     However, I believe that the public interest, and the efficient conduct of FCC business, now
outweighs the reasons for my cautionary recusal, and thus, for the reasons stated below, I have
now decided that I should participate in the proceeding.

     The record demonstrates there has been continued deadlock at the Commission on this
issue. In addition, the D.C. Circuit on more than one occasion remanded the matter back to the
Commission to provide a definitive determination on the issues, and has shown apparent
frustration with the Commission's failure to act. I am very concerned that this situation not
continue.

Furthermore, our DAEO has told me that another factor that is considered under the OGE
regulation is "the difficulty of reassigning the matter."  5 C.F.R.  2635.502(d)(5). He has
recently advised me that this factor is now of controlling importance in his view.  While it is
usually possible to find another federal employee to perform a task, it is simply not possible to
reassign my authority to vote on Commission matters.  Moreover, when one commissioner is
recused the Commission does not usually deadlock.  But it has happened here, compounding a
prior deadlock. .

In addition, the parties opposing the broadcasters, who would be the parties most likely to
question my impartiality since the issue arises because I previously worked for the NAB, have
made clear that they believe that I should participate.  

     For all of these reasons, I have once again asked the FCC's ethics officials to consider
whether I could participate in this proceeding and they have authorized my participation.
                            - FCC -