The U.S. Senate, acting despite a veto threat from the Bush administration, voted Tuesday 55-40 to pass a resolution that would stop new FCC regulations from strengthening the ability of media conglomerates to increase their reach.

The resolution, which would overturn the FCC’s June regulations allowing television stations to reach 45 percent of the national audience, an increase from the previous limit of 35 percent, is expected to face tough opposition in the House as well as from President Bush.

The regulations would also permit cross-ownership by media entities, allowing them to own newspaper, television and several radio organizations within a given market. The regulations were to be enacted pending a decision from a federal appeals court.

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who voted in favor of overturning the FCC regulations, released a statement later that day justifying his support of the resolution.

“I believe that the FCC went too far in their ruling on media ownership, and today’s vote takes a step toward correcting that action,” Harkin said. “Allowing massive over-consolidation squelches needed diversity in the media and local communities.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, voted against the resolution.

“Iowa broadcasters, and I know them to be as civic-minded and concerned about local news coverage as anyone, relayed to me that they didn’t support the approach of throwing out everything the FCC had done, with no opportunity to fine tune anything,” Grassley said in a written statement regarding the vote. “So, I have more confidence in a process that will have the Senate Commerce Committee study the proposed regulations so the full Senate will have their findings and recommendations to make a more informed decision.”

ISU experts said while the resolution may not actually pass in the House, the importance of what the resolution represents is great.

“This resolution is a significant acknowledgment that conglomerates may be dominating the messages we receive through the media, and that may result in a loss of communication,” said Michael Bugeja, director of the Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication. “This has brought the issue to the core conversation.”

Bugeja said the FCC’s decision to widen the reach of media conglomerates may have been born out of the fear that free television would “fall by the wayside of Internet and cable.” He also spoke of the complexity of the problem.

“I don’t believe media conglomerates are going to starve without the new regulations,” Bugeja said. “I do believe, however, that the current imbalance will grow if they are kept.

“But this is a large issue,” he added. “Media conglomerates do offer our students not only jobs and internships, for which I am very grateful, but they also expand the range and reach of our students, and that’s a good thing.”

Barbara Mack, associate professor of journalism and communication, underlined the astounding nature of the Senate’s decision.

“It is extraordinarily rare that either house of Congress would be so bold to pass a resolution overturning a federal agency’s decision,” she said. “It’s evident that the Senate clearly disapproved of what the FCC did earlier this year. It’s a rare and highly critical step.”

Mack said she thought the new regulations were “absolutely terrible,” and they had given rise to corporate giants like Clear Channel Communications.

“That means that there are viewpoints that may not be commercially successful that may never be heard,” Mack said. “This affects everything from political thought to alternative rock, and limits the number of opportunities people have to learn.”

— The Associated Press contributed to this story.