> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://broadbandbreakfast.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Rachel Goodman: Baseless Election Interference Threats from the FCC
- URL: https://broadbandbreakfast.com/rachel-goodman-baseless-election-interference-threats-from-the-fcc/
- Published: 2026-10-31T19:32:56.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-31T19:32:56.000Z
- Description: The FCC has consistently affirmed that it has no authority to dictate how broadcasters report polls or election results.
- Author: Rachel Goodman
- Tags: Expert Opinion, #with-siderail, Democracy, Broadcast, Brendan Carr, FCC, polling, Ronald Reagan, Al Gore, George W. Bush, Joe Biden, James Talarico, Stephen Colbert, Rachel Goodman

President **Donald Trump** and his administration are engaged in an unprecedented effort to turn the full power of the federal government against our elections. And Federal Communications Commission Chair **Brendan Carr** is eager to be Trump’s chief lieutenant in that campaign by controlling what voters hear and watch.

The closer we get to Election Day, the clearer the focus on campaigns, voters, and elections becomes.

[![CTA Image](https://storage.ghost.io/c/29/97/29976d9d-89ea-4c77-8c0b-0e8a0eafed35/content/images/2026/10/ai_and_congress_event_graphic_v4-jpg-2.jpg)](https://payments-na1.hubspot.com/payments/7TyXGqH4bm?referrer=PAYMENT%5FLINK&ref=broadbandbreakfast.com) 

[***Sign up for Broadband and AI in the Next Congress on Dec 1!**](https://broadbandbreakfast.com/broadband-and-ai/)

[Don't Miss Out! ](https://payments-na1.hubspot.com/payments/7TyXGqH4bm?referrer=PAYMENT%5FLINK&ref=broadbandbreakfast.com) 

At the end of the summer, President Trump trained his ire on the reporting of “fake polls” showing his political weakness and invited the FCC to “do something.” Trump has a history of slapping the “fake” moniker on any news he finds unflattering. Carr then said in an interview he might put out guidance on fake polls. 

Then, in late October, Carr seized on reports of fabricated poll results to once again jawbone broadcasters, threatening to invoke the FCC’s “News Distortion” and “Broadcast Hoax” regulations against stations airing fake polls. 

This week, Carr doubled down on his threats, claiming that he was “just reminding broadcasters of existing rules and precedents.” He was not. The FCC has no authority whatsoever to regulate the airing of polls or election results in the absence of concrete evidence that a broadcaster intentionally falsified its reporting.

For more than half a century, under Republican and Democratic chairs alike, the FCC has consistently affirmed that it has no authority to dictate how broadcasters report polls or election results.

In 1970 a California voter asked the FCC to stop broadcasters from reporting horse-race polling in the month before an election. The FCC [ruled](https://protect.checkpoint.com/v2/r01/%5F%5F%5Fhttps://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc770878/m1/460/%5F%5F%5F.YzJ1OnByb3RlY3RkZW1vY3JhY3k6Yzpnb29nbGVfbWFpbF9hdHRhY2htZW50OjdmNjEzNGE4NzVlMzJiZTRkOWJlMjZlZDc3ZGViM2IzOjc6MTQzMzplZDI3MzZlODNlYjhhZGMxMDBmNzBkYjM3ZWJiNjI3OTU2OGMxYmFlMmFmZjdjNmM2ZWU0MmM0NmI5NDA2YTIzOnA6VDpG?ref=broadbandbreakfast.com) that any such measure would violate both the First Amendment’s and the Communications Act’s prohibition on government censorship. Two years later, then-Governor **Ronald Reagan** asked the Commission to prohibit the airing of election results projections before West Coast polls had closed. 

Again the Commission demurred, citing anti-censorship laws. The FCC remained consistent on this point, later refusing an invitation to investigate networks for calling the Florida race for **Al Gore** over **George W. Bush** while polls remained open. And the Commission [reiterated](https://protect.checkpoint.com/v2/r01/%5F%5F%5Fhttps://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-408880A1.pdf%5F%5F%5F.YzJ1OnByb3RlY3RkZW1vY3JhY3k6Yzpnb29nbGVfbWFpbF9hdHRhY2htZW50OjdmNjEzNGE4NzVlMzJiZTRkOWJlMjZlZDc3ZGViM2IzOjc6NTkyNTpiMWJiNWQwZjNhMDUzMDhjNzkxY2MwNGM2NGZjOWE2N2JlN2YxYmJhZmU1MjM5YTQ4MmE3ZWU2ODBlMzU5ODdhOnA6VDpG?ref=broadbandbreakfast.com) the point at the tail end of the Biden administration.

Carr’s statement about “existing rules and precedents” seems to refer to a 1968 incident, where the FCC chastised broadcasters for airing the results of their own shoddily constructed polls without explaining what they were. But the Commission explicitly [repudiated](https://protect.checkpoint.com/v2/r01/%5F%5F%5Fhttps://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1983-10-28/pdf/FR-1983-10-28.pdf%5F%5F%5F.YzJ1OnByb3RlY3RkZW1vY3JhY3k6Yzpnb29nbGVfbWFpbF9hdHRhY2htZW50OjdmNjEzNGE4NzVlMzJiZTRkOWJlMjZlZDc3ZGViM2IzOjc6YjQwMzplNTYyOGUwYjIyZjg3MzIwOTViNDQ1YzZkMGFjNDdmZWNhM2Q3YTE3NTc1YzMxOWRiYjc2ODFjZjc2Mzg1MDBiOnA6VDpG?ref=broadbandbreakfast.com) that statement in 1983.

Carr’s goal has always been the same, and it has always been fundamentally political: Prevent Americans from hearing news the President doesn’t like in order to tilt the playing field in his favor.

Since taking office, Carr has deployed the FCC as a weapon aimed at chilling broadcasters’ speech. His abuses have taken the form of threats (e.g., Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension) and formal investigations and proceedings, like the early license renewal of ABC, sometimes linked to the added leverage of a pending corporate merger (e.g., the revival of a zombie news-distortion complaint over 60 Minutes’ Kamala Harris interview).

Earlier this year, the Commission investigated *The View* over an interview with Democratic Texas Senate candidate **James Talarico**. And CBS kept **Stephen Colbert’s** interview with Talarico off the air after Carr issued legally dubious new guidance questioning whether late-night shows qualify for the “bona fide news interview" exemption to equal-time requirements.

As Election Day approaches, it’s obvious that Carr’s agenda is part of the Trump administration’s three-pronged [strategy](https://protect.checkpoint.com/v2/r01/%5F%5F%5Fhttps://protectdemocracy.org/executive-override/%5F%5F%5F.YzJ1OnByb3RlY3RkZW1vY3JhY3k6Yzpnb29nbGVfbWFpbF9hdHRhY2htZW50OjdmNjEzNGE4NzVlMzJiZTRkOWJlMjZlZDc3ZGViM2IzOjc6MjY4ZjozN2Y4OTlmNDA2MGI4ZjQyZDYxMTk5Mzg4MjMzMDI5NGVkZTMzYTZhNjJjMzU0MzM0ODAwOTUzNGM1MmFmYzQxOnA6VDpG?ref=broadbandbreakfast.com) to undermine free and fair elections: deceive voters about the trustworthiness of election systems, disrupt the smooth operation of those systems, and use any ensuing chaos to deny election outcomes if their preferred candidates don’t win.

The “deny” piece is particularly relevant here. It’s much easier to claim your party’s losses can’t possibly be legitimate if you suppress polling that predicts those losses, or exit polling that supports them.

Polling establishes expectations. Race projections and live results establish the public understanding of what actually happened. That’s what makes the logical next step even more disconcerting. 

Carr could well use these same tactics to influence how the networks cover the election results themselves—pressuring them to suppress reporting on vote counts, delay race calls for Democrats, or air baseless accusations of voting fraud, to name a few examples. The goal of all this would be to lay the groundwork for rejecting legitimate election outcomes.

Carr does not, however, have the Constitution, the law, or the FCC’s own regulations on his side. His success depends on coercing and intimidating broadcasters into doing what he cannot legally order them to do. 

Broadcasters must stand firm, confident that the law is on their side. The media’s role in informing the public is most vital around elections--this is the moment where broadcasters must stiffen their spines to perform their role in our democracy that warrants their First Amendment protections. Any other choice in response to Carr's threats would be a shameful abdication of the press's position as the Fourth Estate.

***Rachel Goodman co-leads*** [***Protect Democracy’s***](https://protectdemocracy.org/?ref=broadbandbreakfast.com) ***Free Expression and the Right to Dissent team, working to protect speech and press freedom through litigation and other forms of advocacy. Rachel has developed and filed impact litigation for 15 years, including leading Protect Democracy’s Law for Truth project. Rachel began her career at the ACLU’s Racial Justice Program, where she filed housing discrimination cases and led successful efforts to force Facebook to disallow racial discrimination in its advertising. This Expert Opinion is Exclusive to Broadband Breakfast.***

***Broadband Breakfast accepts commentary from informed observers of the broadband scene. Please send pieces to*** [***commentary@breakfast.media***](mailto:commentary@breakfast.media)***. The views expressed in Expert Opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the views of Broadband Breakfast and Breakfast Media LLC.***