POP MUSIC : A War That Isn’t Over : A year after agreeing to warning labels, the recording industry is under fire again as bills to curb explicit lyrics are pushed in 8 states

Al Edwards is a 53-year-old Texan and the father of three teen-agers. He also happens to be an outspoken seven-term Democrat state representative who made national news last year by offering this solution to the drug problem: Chop off the fingers of dealers.

His bill didn’t go very far in the Texas Legislature, but he was very passionate about his legislative solution. As he explains it now: “First, I think they ought to hack one joint off the little finger. Next conviction, they should cut the entire finger off. After that, chop off another finger each time the guy gets caught dealing.”

Now the politician, who was state chairman for Jesse Jackson’s presidential campaigns in 1984 and 1988, has his sights set on a new target that he feels is as dangerous as the national drug epidemic: obscene pop music lyrics.

Though not as extreme as his previous suggestion, which died last year in committee, Edwards’ latest effort is a novel piece of legislation aimed at punishing recording industry producers and manufacturers who market “harmful” lyrics to minors.

“These vulgar lyrics are a disgrace before humanity and God,” said Edwards. “The owners of these record companies need to be punished for preying on tender minds. They don’t care what this stuff does to the youth of America. They’re just out to make a buck. What these guys need is to be hung up by their toes.” While his legislation wouldn’t require that drastic an action, it would require that offending companies be fined $3,000 per violation.

Edwards--whose father, grandfather and three brothers are Baptist ministers--said he believes that the “moral fabric” of popular music has been in decline for decades. But it wasn’t until last year, after a labeling bill in nearby Louisiana was defeated, that he began to view government intervention as the only solution to alleviate the “escalating” explicit lyric problem.

“Nobody is singing about love or sweetness like they used to when I was coming up,” Edwards said. “And it’s not getting any better. In fact, every year it seems to get worse. All you hear these days are kids rapping about anger and violence and filthy sex. I don’t know how they can call this garbage music anymore.”

The Houston lawmaker is not alone and that’s what’s worrying the record industry. Similar legislation has been introduced in seven other states already this year.

While few legislators interviewed by The Times could list exactly what songs qualified as offensive, such artists as the Florida rap group 2 Live Crew, New York rappers BWP and Los Angeles rock band Guns N’ Roses--all of which put warning labels on their recordings--were frequently cited as the “type” of music to which lawmakers objected.

The war over offensive lyrics in pop music raged across America’s social/political landscape for most of last year. After skirmishes in several states, record industry officials thought they had largely won the war against what they considered censorship. But the new legislative offensives prove otherwise and there are indications that the forces against offensive lyrics have come up with some new wrinkles that observers say may greatly improve the chances of legislation becoming laws.

John Mitchell, legislative counsel for the National Assn. of Recording Merchandisers (NARM), the organization that represents most of the nation’s major record retail chains, says that the new proposals may win greater public support than last year’s bills because they appear to be less radical.

“Last year, the proposals were written with such overkill that the sheer ridiculous nature of their scope produced a negative reaction by other legislators to each bill,” Mitchell said. “The appeal of this new round is that it appears to be cloaked in an air of rationality.”

In addition to the Texas legislation, here’s a rundown on the legislative proposals in the seven other states:

* In Massachusetts, an obscenity measure introduced last month by Rep. Barbara E. Gray (R-Middlesex) would prevent the sale or rental to minors of “pornographic” books, records or videos and subject retailers to a $250-per-day fine for displaying such material.

* In Oregon, legislators have drafted a proposal that would permit parents or guardians of minors to file lawsuits for punitive damages of up to $2,500 against merchants who sell “obscene” books, audio and video recordings to anyone under 18.

* In South Carolina, a bill by Rep. John Rama (R-Charleston County) seeks to extend the state obscenity codes to prohibit the sale of recordings that contain “ swear or curse words,” and lyrics that are “sexually explicit” or advocate “violence or criminal conduct” to anyone under 18.

* In Nebraska, a proposed measure prohibits minors from attending obscene shows and presentations.

* In New York and New Jersey, mandatory stickering bills are also being considered and in Florida a harmful-to-minors statute is being weighed.

First Amendment monitors warn that these bills--particularly those seeking to amend obscenity codes--present a new set of legal obstacles.

“By casting the debate in terms of whether you are pro-obscenity or anti-obscenity, it might be easier for legislators to avoid the constitutional censorship debate,” said Art Kropp, president of People for the American Way, a nonprofit, Washington-based free speech group founded in 1980. “It’s not like you’re arguing against music then. Once you can categorize something as pornographic, it’s easier to strip it of free-speech protection.”

But Edwards says he has no time for detractors who dismiss anti-explicit lyric legislation as a form of censorship.

“The obscenity codes in our country just do not go far enough,” Edwards said. “Music is as dangerous as drugs nowadays. To be quite frank with you, I wish we could make it illegal for anyone to perform or record this dirt at all. Sure, I realize that the entertainment industry is going to send their little lobbyists down here trying to stop me, but that’s only going to make me work harder to get it passed.”

It was last spring that the Recording Industry Assn. of America bowed to the threat in 18 states of mandatory warning stickers on offensive albums and introduced a standardized advisory notice to be voluntarily attached to albums with explicit lyrics.

After spelling out the specifics of the voluntary plan at a nationally televised press conference at the Capitol Hilton last May 10, Jay Berman, president of the organization, which lobbies Congress on behalf of the nation’s major record companies, recalls feeling a sense of accomplishment.

“We viewed the announcement as a turning point in the lyric war battle,” Berman said in a recent interview. “Prior to that, the industry was getting beat up pretty bad in state legislatures. But we perceived the (standardized sticker) as a new weapon. It answered the concerns of parents but permitted record companies to retain creative control over the music.”

Starting last July, all major record companies and most independent labels began attaching the black-and-white RIAA logo underneath the cellophane shrink wrap in the lower right-hand corner of every potentially offensive recording released, association officials said. While statistics are not available from the association, observers estimate that almost 100 new releases were stickered in the last six months of 1990.

Jennifer Norwood, executive director of the Parents Music Resource Center, the Arlington, Va.-based media watchdog group that first called for warning stickers on explicit albums in 1985, said her organization was satisfied by the industry’s voluntary labeling system.

“We would hope that state legislators might take a closer look at the industry’s voluntary plan,” Norwood said recently. “We would encourage them to drop their legislation.”

But Jean Dixon, the former Missouri state representative whose 1989 lyrics-label bill led to legislators in 17 other states drafting similar proposals last year, is not satisfied with the voluntary program and still thinks government intervention is needed.

“The situation has not improved one bit,” Dixon said. “The record companies made us a lot of big promises about voluntarily cleaning up the problem, but they haven’t done anything. Kids are still able to purchase this filthy stuff all over the country and government needs to put a stop to it.”

Several key state figures who led the 1990 pro-stickering drive told The Times that they are relatively pleased with the progress of the industry’s voluntary program.

Despite this support, Berman said his association recognized from the outset that the sticker would never satisfy all politicians.

“Last year we beat back the forces of censorship everywhere they raised their ugly head,” Berman said. “But anyone who thinks the pop music obscenity battle is over ought to think again.”

Three weeks ago, Berman dispatched a lobbyist to Houston to encourage legislators to withdraw their support for Edwards’ new Texas proposal, which is currently stalled in the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee.

The measure would grant prosecutors the power to fine up to $3,000 per infraction any firm that produces, manufactures or distributes “harmful” recordings without warning stickers, and allow district attorneys to seek injunctive relief against company executives to prevent future violations.

The bill would also prohibit the “exhibition” of “harmful” recordings with warning stickers in any store that minors are allowed to enter. Violators would be subject to a maximum penalty of $1,000 and/or 180 days in jail.

While Berman’s group hopes to kill Edwards’ proposal in committee, even if it passed, the recording industry association believes the bill could never withstand a legal challenge.

“Under the test that the Supreme Court laid down in 1973, for something to be called obscene it has to meet certain criteria,” Berman said. “It has to be without artistic merit. Now, whether you enjoy a certain kind of song or not, music is a creative art form. And our basic position from the beginning has been that it would be virtually impossible to find any legitimate music per se . . . obscene.”

First Amendment advocates suggest the same fate for legislation pending in other states.

“I am constantly amazed by the sight of these legislators scrambling to suppress popular music,” said Leanne Katz, executive director of the New York-based National Coalition Against Censorship. “None of these proposals could possibly survive a constitutional court battle.”

Despite the furor in state legislatures over the harmful lyric issue, only one retailer has ever been convicted on obscenity charges for selling pop music.

Charles Freeman, a Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., record store owner who sold a sexually explicit 2 Live Crew tape to an adult undercover police officer last June, was fined $1,000 for the obscenity offense by a Southern Florida court.

After Freeman’s arrest, many retailers stripped their shelves of potentially offensive music.

“I stood up for free speech and I paid for it,” said Freeman, who lost his business in the aftermath of the legal battle. His case is up for appeal this summer. “Mom-and-pop stores can’t fight the censors on our own. In 1990, the entertainment industry let little guys like me take the fall. We stood up for America and they abandoned us.”

This year, the music business is mobilizing.

The National Assn. of Recording Merchandisers recently created a fund to finance lobbying efforts and signed on with Rock the Vote, a nonprofit record-industry free-speech coalition, to conduct anti-censorship voter registration drives in record stores around the country.

Rock the Vote, founded last July by some of the most powerful figures in the record industry, seeks to reduce government intervention in the music business by involving young rock fans in the political process. So far, the coalition’s voter registration campaign has been responsible for signing up at least 80,000 new voters.

“Many young rock fans are unaware of what freedoms are at stake in this censorship battle,” Capitol Records president Hale Milgram said. “Once legislators realize that rock fans are paying attention and can vote, they’ll be less likely to sponsor laws that censor music.”

Two weeks ago, Rock the Vote--in conjunction with Rhino Records and Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream--kicked off its second anti-censorship concert tour with stops scheduled at 25 campuses across the nation. The tour is designed to encourage students to lobby Congress to pass the National Voter Registration Act of 1991--a bill that would allow anyone applying for a driver’s license to register to vote at the same time.

Trade groups in the entertainment industry have also forged an alliance to target specific states for lobbying.

Efforts are already under way by the recording industry association, the merchandisers’ association, the Video Software Dealers Assn. and the Motion Picture Assn. of America to defeat legislation in Texas, Oregon and Florida. After such political pressure was brought to bear on explicit lyric-related measures in Arizona, Connecticut and New Mexico, the proposed legislation was withdrawn.

Still, some rock fans believe the industry is not doing enough to protect controversial popular music.

Dave Marsh, East Coast editor of Rock and Roll Confidential, the music newsletter that initiated the counter-assault against rock censorship in 1983, criticized the industry’s efforts as “half-hearted.”

“The Iraqi air force put up a better fight in the Persian Gulf than the retailers and record companies have done battling censorship at home,” Marsh said in a phone interview from New York. “Rock fans are tired of it and that’s why we’re mobilizing on our own.”

Rock and Roll Confidential is preparing to stage First Amendment concerts and launch boycotts against corporations affiliated with anti-rock activities.

“It’s time we start boycotting corporations, including record companies and retailers, that censor our music,” Marsh said. “Nobody has the right to tell us what kind of art we can or cannot enjoy.”

But Rep. Edwards, who is expected to introduce an additional resolution this month barring wholesale distributors from selling explicit albums to Texas retailers, disagrees.

“My bill is just the first step in cleaning this mess up,” said Edwards, who is also sponsoring legislation promoting the reinstatement of prayer in public schools and corporal punishment within the prison system.

“After we get rid of the dirty lyrics, we intend to go after the filthy TV shows and movies. The way I see it, obscenity, like drugs, is contaminating America. Outlawing this garbage guarantees us all a better future.”