U.S. President Joe Biden’s decision to withdraw from the upcoming presidential race signals the end of his administration. As his tenure winds down, the upcoming U.S. presidential election introduces uncertainties about the future impact of his regulatory policies.

Understanding the U.S. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

The Congressional Review Act (CRA), established in 1996, is a tool that the U.S. Congress uses to oversee and potentially overturn rules made by federal agencies. The U.S. Congress, the legislative branch of the U.S. government, consists of two parts—the Senate and the House of Representatives—and is responsible for making laws. Federal agencies are organisations created by the U.S. government to enforce specific laws and regulations. For example, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) focuses on environmental rules, while the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates communication channels like radio and television.

When a federal agency introduces a new rule, it must be submitted to the U.S. Congress. Congress then has 60 session days to examine the rule and, if desired, pass a “joint resolution of disapproval.” If this resolution is approved by both houses of Congress and signed by the U.S. President, the rule is nullified, and similar rules cannot be reissued. This ensures that outgoing administrations cannot impose last-minute regulations that restrict the incoming administration’s policies. However, for the CRA to be effective, the same party must control both Congress and the U.S. Presidency, which is relatively rare in American politics.

Political Perspectives

• Conservative Perspective: Conservatives, typically associated with the U.S. Republican Party, prefer limited government intervention in the economy and emphasise individual freedoms. They view the CRA as a crucial tool for preventing last-minute regulations that could impede the incoming administration’s policies. For instance, during the Trump administration, the CRA was used to overturn 16 rules from the previous Obama administration, which conservatives argued were burdensome and stifled economic growth. If a Republican candidate wins the 2024 election, there is potential for a similar rollback of Biden-era regulations, which conservatives see as necessary for financial freedom and regulatory balance.
• Liberal Perspective: Liberals, often associated with the U.S. Democratic Party, advocate for more government intervention to protect public welfare, including health, environment, and consumer rights. They frequently criticise the CRA for potentially destabilising long-term regulatory policies. For example, overturning U.S. FCC rules related to broadband privacy under the Trump administration is seen as a setback for consumer protections. Liberals argue for preserving regulations that address pressing issues like climate change and public welfare, viewing the CRA as a tool that can be misused to dismantle essential protections.
• Democratic Perspective: U.S. Democrats, also from the U.S. Democratic Party, see the CRA’s impact pragmatically. They recognise its role in ensuring regulatory accountability and caution against its use for purely political motives. The CRA’s “lookback” provision allows a new Congress to review and potentially overturn regulations issued in the last 60 session days of the previous Congress. This provision is powerful but contentious. Democrats emphasise the need for a balanced approach, ensuring that any regulatory rollback is justified and not merely politically driven.

Implications for International Broadcasting

Understanding the CRA and the U.S. regulatory landscape can seem complex for international audiences. However, it’s important to note that international radio stations and streaming services broadcasting in the USA (or any other country) are generally not subject to that country’s national or federal rules and regulations. This is significant in contexts where local media laws or censorship may be more restrictive, and anybody can use a radio station (or any digital media) operating abroad to reach their intended target, either in the USA or any other country.

Impact on Christian Radio in the U.S.

One specific area of interest is how these regulatory shifts impact Christian radio in the U.S. Christian radio stations, like other broadcasters, are subject to U.S. FCC regulations. Changes in U.S. FCC rules, particularly those concerning broadcasting standards, content regulations, and digital discrimination orders, can significantly affect these stations. For example, the reclassification of broadband providers under the Trump administration impacted how internet services are regulated, affecting how Christian radio stations could distribute their content online.

The CRA’s potential to reverse U.S. FCC regulations under a new administration means that Christian radio stations must stay vigilant about regulatory changes. These stations rely on consistent and favourable regulatory environments to effectively reach their audiences, and any regulatory uncertainty can disrupt their operations, funding, and outreach efforts.

Global Implications and Freedoms

International radio stations and streaming services have the advantage of being less susceptible to national regulations and censorship. They can broadcast content across borders without being directly affected by the restrictive media laws of the countries into which they broadcast. This allows for greater freedom of expression and the dissemination of diverse viewpoints, often filling gaps left by domestic broadcasters subject to tighter regulations.

For example, an international Christian radio station broadcasting in the U.S. would not need to comply with U.S. FCC rules, allowing it to operate more freely than domestic stations. This freedom can be precious in countries with stringent censorship laws, as international stations can provide content that might otherwise be suppressed.

In conclusion, while the CRA is a domestic legislative tool with significant implications for U.S. regulations, its impact can extend internationally. Changes in U.S. regulatory policies can influence global market dynamics and broadcasting practices. However, international broadcasters benefit from regulatory independence, allowing them to navigate and broadcast in environments where local media regulations may be restrictive. This underscores the importance of understanding the nuanced interplay between domestic laws and international broadcasting freedoms.