52
Mr. ZAPPA. My name is Frank Zappa. This is my attorney Larry Stein.
The statement that I prepared, that I sent you 100 copies of, is
five pages long, so I have shortened it down and am going to read a
condensed version of it.
Certain things have happened. I have been listening to the event
in the other room and have heard some conflicting reports as to
whether or not people in this committee want legislation. I understand
that Mr. Hollings does from his comments. Is that correct?
The CHAIRMAN. I think you had better concentrate on your testimony,
rather than asking questions.
Mr. ZAPPA. The reason I need to ask it, because I have to change
something in my testimony if there is not a clearcut version of
whether or not legislation is what is being discussed here.
The CHAIRMAN. Do the best you can, because I do not think
anybody here can characterize Senator Hollings' position.
Mr. ZAPPA. I will carry on with the issue, then.
Senator EXON. Mr. Chairman, I might help him out just a little
bit. I might make a statement. This is one Senator that might be
interested in legislation and/or regulation to some extent, recognizing
the problems with the right of free expression.
I have previously expressed views that I do not believe I should
be telling other people what they have to listen to. I really believe
that the suggestion made by the original panel was some kind of
an arrangement for voluntarily policing this in the music industry
as the correct way to go.
If it will help you out in your testimony, I might join Senator
Hollings or others in some kind of legislation and/or regulation,
unless the free enterprise system, both the producers and you as
the performers, see fit to clean up your act.
Mr. ZAPPA. OK, thank you.
The first thing I would like to do, because I know there is some
foreign press involved here and they might not understand what
the issue is about, one of the things the issue is about is the First
Amendment to the Constitution, and it is short and I would like to
read it so they will understand. It says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting
the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press or the
right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a
redress of grievances.
That is for reference.
These are my personal observations and opinions. I speak on
behalf of no group or professional organization.
The PMRC proposal is an ill-conceived piece of nonsense which
fails to deliver any real benefits to children, infringes the civil
liberties of people who are not children, and promises to keep the
courts busy for years dealing with the interpretational and enforcemental
problems inherent in the proposal's design.
It is my understanding that in law First Amendment issues are
decided with a preference for the least restrictive alternative. In
this context, the PMRC demands are the equivalent of treating
dandruff by decapitation.
|
previous | next | contents