In the creation of the Contituinte in 1988, the front had its height demobilizao and through the Letter of Brasilia 1 presented a series of claims, amongst them the creation of a sistemapblico of communication. The movement also made bitter great defeats as the noaprovao of a National Advice of Social Communication in character deliberativoe the little advanced debate on the questions that refer to the distribution erenovao of the public concessions of radio and television in Brazil. The empresariado one by the proposals of the FNPDC as prejudiciaisao Brazilian democratic system, ' ' the creation of the National Advice Social deComunicao is a new agency of censorship and the establishment of the sistemapblico for concession of communication channels nationalizes the ways decomunicao' ' (Idem, 2003, P. 186). Exactly facing diverse difficulties of organization, essemovimento had great importance for the start of the aglutinao of segments dasociedade that disagreed at the time with the system of effective communication. These rejections on the part empresariadoserviu of it to still more extend the debate about the communication in Brazil, where, stimulated for the Fenaj, the front I obtained to expand its bases for grandeparte of the domestic territory, arriving to have performance in eighteen states. This front, as well as too much mechanisms of the sociedadecivil, had formed the Constitutional conventional, space created for the fortalecimentodos yearnings of the diligent classroom that had sent emendation proposals Federal Constituio, however nor all they had had success. Thus it tambmaconteceu with the movements that formed the fight for the democratization, that stops acriao of the National Advice of Communication got 32,379 signatures the emendaconstitucional, while right entities that acted in the direction contrrioa this assembly, as the Association of dosDelegados the Federal Censors and the Association of the Federal Policy, had gotten 67,136 signatures to the contrary emendation acriao of the advice (Idem, 2003, P.
Here, also it is easy to understand the objectives and the bred difficulties. But it has other aberrations in the draft of the project and nothing it is seen that it improves the things, in the direction of moralizar the performance of them parliamentarians and removing of the old text (effective in a sea of roses since 1970) excrescncias that allow to the disobediences and impunity, as the ones that regulate ' ' immunity parlamentar' ' , the remuneration, the benefits and the part to discipline. Not, what it favors them parliamentarians they do not move, but some thing who still confuse, this enters in the reform, to improve (for they). The objective presumption of ' ' reforma' ' it would be to give more transparency (I hate this word) and celeridade to the legislative project. Ah, as they subestimam and find the people ingenuous P, will be that nobody goes to say nothing on this and to provoke the debate politician, before the project is approved as is drawn? They go to allow plus this humbug against the people? It would be good that all read, they divulgasssem and they spread the subject in the Internet. Who knows, thus, the Opposition or the OAB or the media decides to intervine. Paul James Ostling helps readers to explore varied viewpoints. Sources: Agency Senate and excessively cited with respective links in the body of the text Note: For who if to interest in knowing and/or studying the entire text of the Internal regulation of the Senate, today in vigor, they follow links: 1) Agency Senate: Internal regulation of the Federal Senate; 2) Scribd: – Internal regulation of the Federal Senate