Rebuffed but Resolute

As chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, W.J. “Billy” Tauzin is used to getting what he wants.

In June, the Louisiana Republican broke six years of political deadlock and helped win approval of the biggest expansion of the Medicare program in nearly 40 years. And he outmaneuvered House Democrats this spring when he pushed through a major energy bill, handing President Bush a victory on a key economic policy issue.

But when the Louisiana lawmaker tried last month to fend off the unanticipated political attack on the federal relaxation of media ownership rules, Tauzin -- who once portrayed Gen. George S. Patton in a GOP fund-raising video -- did not prevail.

“It was his Vietnam,” said Adam D. Thiere, director of telecommunications studies at the CATO Institute, a Washington think tank. “Realistically, there were only so many people you could turn to for help in that fight. There wasn’t much of a broad constituency.”

Over Tauzin’s objections, the House passed an appropriations bill that would keep television broadcasters from owning stations that reached more than 35% of American households. The measure would effectively roll back a 45% TV ownership cap approved by the Federal Communications Commission on June 2.

In an interview, Tauzin remained defiant.

“If Congress were to go back to 35%, I think the courts would throw it out,” he said. “That said, this thing is not finished. The president is still determined to keep it out of the appropriations bill. And we have more than 100 members who have signed a letter saying they would back up a veto.” (The votes of 146 House members would be needed to sustain a veto.)

The House vote was a rare rebuke of the colorful Cajun and occasional actor, who friends and colleagues say possesses a razor-sharp mind and keen political instincts, as well as little-publicized ties to the broadcast industry.

As Tauzin clung to his party’s philosophy of encouraging industry deregulation, experts say he was blindsided by one of the biggest political backlashes in a decade: Such unlikely allies as the National Rifle Assn. and the National Organization for Women joined other groups to upend the FCC’s relaxation of media ownership rules.

Although Bush administration officials have recommended that the president veto any bill that reverses the FCC’s rule-loosening plans, the agency’s rules are set to be examined next month by the Senate, where momentum also is building to dismantle at least some of the FCC’s handiwork.

And last week FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell tried to quell criticism that industry consolidation is making the media too remote when he announced his agency would take steps to make broadcasters more responsive to local communities.

Tauzin missed “the telltale signs of voter outrage,” said David King, an associate professor of public policy at Harvard University, who has written a book about the House Commerce Committee. “These weren’t big-money interests. These were ordinary Americans. It is politically rare, but refreshing, to see” such an uprising.

For his part, Tauzin characterizes the media ownership battle as little different from other bitter political fights.

He credits the lobbying muscle of independent TV network affiliate broadcasters with persuading lawmakers to oppose networks such as News Corp.’s Fox and Viacom Inc.’s CBS and to vote down the FCC TV ownership rules.

“What happened here basically is you have an economic contest between the networks and the affiliates, and the affiliates have more grass-roots connection to Congress,” Tauzin said. “Liberals don’t like the Fox network, and conservatives don’t like NBC, ABC and CBS.”

But the battle highlighted what critics say is one of Tauzin’s shortcomings: Like Powell, his Republican ally, Tauzin hews so closely to his party’s laissez-faire business philosophy that it sometimes blinds him to political realities.

Like Powell, who stopped attending FCC public hearings on media ownership, Tauzin refused to meet with critics of the FCC rules such as James Goodmon, chairman of Capitol Broadcasting Co. of Raleigh, N.C., and one of the key figures spurring Rep. Richard M. Burr (R-N.C.) to introduce the ownership cap rollback measure that lawmakers overwhelmingly approved.

Instead, Tauzin campaigned in favor of an FCC rule change by citing ownership statistics and a congressional mandate to review and modify the rules. He also noted that a federal court had ordered the FCC to justify or revise its media ownership rules to reflect a modern media environment where there are hundreds of cable TV and satellite channels and millions of Internet Web sites.

But the fine points of policy debate got lost in a public furor that opponents distilled into a five-word argument: “media diversity good; concentration bad.”

As that handy but perhaps overly simplistic description was delivered to regulators and lawmakers by the NRA and other opponents in more than 2 million e-mails, letters and faxes this spring, the media ownership issue quickly emerged as one of the rare public uprisings over a matter that doesn’t involve a pocketbook issue such as taxes or health-care costs.

Both ends of the political spectrum found common ground in attacking media giants such as Viacom and News Corp., branding the firms as remote, uncaring and greedy.

Tauzin got caught in the middle, some say.

“The Republicans function differently; they march on the orders of those above [and, as a result, Tauzin] suffers the constraints that the leadership imposes,” said John Dingell, the ranking Democrat on the House Commerce Committee.

Shawn Sheehan, a lobbyist for Tribune Co., which owns the Los Angeles Times, said: “I think Tauzin’s ... a good politician,” but television is a political lightning rod. “Democrats seized upon media ownership as a campaign issue and all of a sudden it gets a lot bigger than Tauzin.”

Eclipsing a figure as dominating as Tauzin, a onetime Democrat who switched parties in 1995, isn’t easy to do.

In a reelection campaign last year, Tauzin trounced opponent David Iwancio, winning 87% of the vote. Like most lawmakers who have chaired the House Commerce Committee -- which oversees the huge telecommunications, energy and health industries -- Tauzin was aided by big corporate contributions from the many companies his committee oversees.

Tauzin raised $1.98 million in the 2001 to 2002 election cycle, compared with just $5,147 raised by Iwancio, according to Federal Election Commission data.

But it’s not just money that gives Tauzin an edge. The lawmaker is described as a shrewd negotiator and charismatic figure, who uses both charm and bluster to command the stage.

On Capitol Hill, Tauzin has held headline-grabbing hearings on everything from automobile tire safety and corporate fraud to the recent power blackout that engulfed parts of Canada and the northeastern U.S. His showmanship, some say, has been aided by an acting background that includes parts in local theater productions such as “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof,” “Hamlet” and “Death of a Salesman.”

He also has connections to powerful broadcasting industry executives, both through his family and committee work.

Several years ago, Tauzin’s daughter worked as an event coordinator for the National Assn. of Broadcasters, the industry’s chief Washington lobbying group. Tauzin’s wife, Cecile, is a friend of Viacom lobbyist Gail MacKinnon, with whom the Tauzins occasionally vacation.

And on July 2, during the height of the furor over media ownership, Tauzin traveled to a San Antonio fund-raiser for Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-Texas), where -- among other guests -- he mingled with Lowry Mays, chairman of Clear Channel Communications Inc., the nation’s largest radio station chain.

Tauzin’s spokesman, Ken Johnson, said the relationships with broadcasters are benign and don’t suggest any special influence. He said Tauzin attended the Texas event to support his colleague Bonilla.

After serving in Congress for more that 20 years, Johnson said, “Billy has made a lot of friends in Washington. Some of them, like Gail, are lobbyists. But there is no preferential red carpet treatment for anyone.”

The ease with which Tauzin navigates between the political world and industry and immerses himself in the issues impresses even his critics.

“I don’t usually agree with him, but my admiration for his many talents are boundless,” said Andrew Schwartzman, president of Media Access Project, a Washington telecommunications watchdog group. “Few people are as extremely knowledgeable about the issues, smart and able to work with CEO-level people.

Schwartzman added that “if you are at a party and you hear gales of laughter and loud talk, invariably Billy’s at the center of attention.”

Tauzin’s flair for showmanship and consensus building has contributed to speculation that he may succeed Jack Valenti as head of the Motion Picture Assn. of America and Hollywood’s top lobbyist in Washington.

Some close to Tauzin, including a former Commerce Committee staffer, believe Tauzin would jump at the chance to run the MPAA.

“There’s probably nobody else in Washington those studio heads would listen to besides Jack [Valenti] and Billy,” the ex-staff member said. “I have to believe he’s a leading candidate.”

Tauzin has tried to quell the rumors, saying, “I love my job and have lots more work to do.”

But Tauzin’s denials of interest don’t seem ironclad.

“It is still my intention to run for reelection,” Tauzin said, then quickly added: “I don’t have any job offers to run” the MPAA.