Weber’s firm gets down to Sirius (and XM) business

June 3rd, 2008 – 5:11 PM by Emily Kaiser

By the end of this month, satellite radio users might be getting their sports, shock jock Howard Stern and Oprah Winfrey programming from the same provider, thanks in part to a former Minnesota congressman-turned-lobbyist.

Former U.S. Rep. Vin Weber, managing partner of Clark & Weinstock, will be lobbying for the merger of the nation’s only two satellite radio providers, Sirius and XM Satellite, which could get final approval as early as June 30. American Public Media hired Clark & Weinstock to lobby for the merger, which already received Department of Justice approval in March.

The merger is still waiting on a Federal Communications Commission ruling. It isn’t on the agency’s June agenda, but “the commission could still act by the end of the second quarter,” FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said in a May news conference.

The merger has come under some scrutiny in the past year from consumer groups and federal and state lawmakers who say it could cause increased prices and fewer choices for consumers. Many groups have requested provisions to the merger, including a la carte subscriptions, no price increases for three years and a return of some of the radio spectrum it occupies to other competitions.

12 Responses to "Weber’s firm gets down to Sirius (and XM) business" says:

June 3rd, 2008 at 5:28 pm

Why all this attention to Republicans? O.T. had some interesting comments about Keith Hakim Ellison and his disturbing ties to extremist groups, why don’t you guys ever discuss important issues like that?

Vin Weber and satellite radio? Who cares?

SgtPendleton says:

June 3rd, 2008 at 9:46 pm

D2, go back to KK’s blog with all your nut jobs if you don’t like it here.

Cash N. Carey says:

June 3rd, 2008 at 10:51 pm


The Star continues to pay the price for the their liberal rants. As I quoted a few weeks back the liberal newspapers are losing readers while the more moderate papers are doing better. I guess if these “journalists” were good at business they would be repubs. Stick around, you are a voice of reason on this site. says:

June 4th, 2008 at 4:39 am

Thanks Cash N. Carey.

Jay says:

June 4th, 2008 at 7:22 am

Political yik-yak asside, I need to agree with Dare2 on at least one part of his post…..satellite radio mergers? Seriously? Was this article posted on the wrong blog by accident?

parthian says:

June 4th, 2008 at 9:00 am

Ha-ha, 2D as a “voice of reason”! Talk about Orwellian degeneration of language.

This topic seems fine but the problem is not many people know very much about the FCC regulatory process, or satellite radio or radio markets, so it’s not going to generate much discussion, not that anything really does here.

Here we have the only two providers of this type of broadcasting communication in the country seeking to merge so that there will be a single monopoly provider across the country, and conservative BQers don’t even think it’s a qualified topic. It’s a big deal, we just don’t really know enough to comment on it.

And of course there’s a continued focus on Repubs, 2D, especially in the executive branch—that’s where all the malfeasance and abuse in government stems from. Once you “conservatives” lose the election and are reduced to a rump of powerless bitter cranks, the focus will change to Dems.

Les says:

June 4th, 2008 at 9:06 am

Speaking of proposed mergers…

Seems socialization of medical care isnt all it’s cracked up to be.

Les says:

June 4th, 2008 at 9:24 am


I think the companies that provide several channels of music via satellite for music on hold might disagree with you, but hey, we all know you read your comic books religioiusly..

Worring about commercial sattelite audio communications being monopolized is right up there with worring about Mars Inc having a monopoly on snickers bars.

Despite the fact your wrong about the satellite broadcast industry in general, there are many other way to get your mobile ear candy beside sattelite.

I will agree with you that in general, monopolies are a bad thing, but in the area of optional non essential services, it’s not really a big deal. Primarily becasue if the merged company were to fail, who’d really care??

Look at the bright side, if Sirrius and XM go away, everyone would have to listen to MPR when there out in the boonies.

O.T. says:

June 4th, 2008 at 9:55 am

On Wednesday, despite claims by one of Gore’s representatives two months ago, it was revealed that his Generation Investment Management private equity fund has taken a 9.5 percent stake in a company that has one of the largest carbon credit portfolios in the world.

Yet, on April 6, NewsBusters’ Matthew Vadum reported that in response to his The Media Ignore Al Gore’s Planned Global Warming Profiteering article, a GIM spokesman called his piece a “nonsense story” while claiming that neither Gore nor any other members of GIM’s board have the slightest financial vested interest in the expansion of carbon trading.

parthian says:

June 4th, 2008 at 11:03 am

The antitrust laws have no exceptions for “optional non essential services”, but you’re ignorant of that, of course. The concern for the economy is not really when a monopoly fails, but when it succeeds.

The post itself says that these two companies are “the nation’s only two satellite radio providers”, but if you want to imagine an army of non existent satellite radio competitors, you go right ahead. So you’re not yet ready for Big-Boy books—maybe someday!

Les says:

June 4th, 2008 at 11:59 am

Again Chicken little proves he cant read unless the pictures give him a clue.

Nowhere did I say this action was legal or desireable, even agreeing with you that monoplies are a bad thing.

This however, is a non event, even if it is found to be an illegal entity.

But hey, when you think the sky falling all around you, I guess even the smallest bit of dust is cause for alarm.

Go ahead and keep your head in the sand. It wont erase the existance of other companies that provide similar services, albiet they dont sell mobile recievers.

Quoting a BQ blog entry from a local reporter as an authortative source is about your speed, though. I guess I should be happy, because it’s about the first time you’ve actually attempted to back up your BS with a source other than your closed mind.

Jay says:

June 4th, 2008 at 12:01 pm

parth: “The antitrust laws have no exceptions for “optional non essential services”, but you’re ignorant of that, of course.”

….and yet there does appear to be an exception for one industry that is not truely optional and definately essential. That exception of course is the railroad.

I’m sure parthian already knew that, as he is knower of all things.

This is a place where open-minded critical thinkers of all political persuasions encounter information and arguments that both support and challenge their preconceptions. The goal is not to eliminate differences but to narrow and clarify them. We begin with a bedrock agreement that the search for insight and clarity is important, serious - and fun.

We ask commenters to be civil and substantive and, if possible, good humored. We reserve the right to delete comments that disregard this request.

Follow The Big Question on Twitter Do you use Twitter? Follow The Big Question.