Now imagine if you were a business that had invested in broadcasting
music over satellites for example and the government now decided that
it was going to use its satellites to broadcast music to anyone for
free. (For the sake of the argument ignore the copyright aspects of
the music itself, just focusing here on the act of broadcasting).

The difference here is us taxpyers have paid for these satellites on which
this private company wants a free ride. Huge difference. If Accuweather
wants to launch THEIR own satellites (as per your example), more power to
them.

You'd probably be unhappy with having to compete with the government
producing a final product (sat. transmission) as well.

Ridiculous. It's more like the taxpayers paying for the musicians and
infrastructure for a broadcast, then having some company charging you
admission to hear it.


So is there a coincidence that Santorum and Accuweather are in the
same state? Not all. Probably filed a bill at the request of his
constituents, and Accuweather does hire a lot of people in central
Pennsylvania. Even if Santorum himself disagrees with the bill, it
would be nice of him to file a bill on behalf of constituents. Many
politicians wouldn't bother.

Right. Maybe I will go into the public park entrance fee charging business
and pay off. uh - I mean "lobby" my senator to pass a bill making it into
law. Since it's what I want, he should mindlessly do as I ask, right?

Finally it is important to note that under no circumstances would
Aviation or Marine forecasts be affected under the bill.

Many sources which aviators and mariners use would be affected.