Proposed as a part of the reauthorization was an amendment, authored by Ewin L. Davis, a Democratic member of the House of Representatives from Tennessee, which specified in more detail the standards to be followed to ensure an "equitable allocation" of stations: SEC.
The second paragraph of section 9 of the Radio Act of 1927 is amended to read as follows: "It is hereby declared that the people of all the zones established by section 2 of this Act are entitled to equality of radio broadcasting service, both of transmission and of reception, and in order to provide said equality the licensing authority shall as nearly as possible make and maintain an equal allocation of broadcasting licenses, of bands of frequency or wave lengths, of periods of time for operation, and of station power, to each of said zones when and in so far as there are applications therefor; and shall make a fair and equitable allocation of licenses, wave lengths, time for operation, and station power to each of the States, the District of Columbia, the Territories and possessions of the United States within each zone, according to population.
Despite strong opposition from the National Association of Broadcasters and the largest radio firms, the Davis Amendment rider was included as part of the FRC reauthorization.
Using the Davis Amendment standard as a justification, WJKS in Gary, Indiana petitioned the FRC to eliminate two stations located in Chicago, WIBO and WPCC, that were timesharing on 560 kHz, so that it could begin operating full-time on their cleared frequency.
The Communications Act of 1934, which replaced the FRC with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), incorporated the Davis Amendment requirements in its Section 307(b), with one additional proviso: Provided further, That the Commission may also grant applications for additional licenses for stations not exceeding one hundred watts of power if the Commission finds that such stations will serve the public convenience, interest, or necessity, and that their operation will not interfere with the fair and efficient radio service of stations licensed under the provisions of this section.However, even with this change the FCC struggled with implementing the Davis Amendment equalization requirements, and worked for its repeal.
Reflecting the opposition to the Davis Amendment by members of the FCC, Senator Burton K. Wheeler, head of the Committee on Interstate Commerce, reported that "on May 23, 1935, the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission wrote the chairman of your committee as follows": The existing law, which S. 2243 seeks to repeal, is contrary to natural laws and has resulted in the concentration of the use of frequencies in centers of population, and the restriction of facilities in sparsely populated States, even though interference consideration would permit the operation of one or more additional stations.
[6] Although this allowed a modest increase in the number of radio stations, it did not lead to wholesale changes in the structure of the AM broadcast band, as most of its organization remained unchanged from what had been created while following the Davis Amendment requirements.