Senators took a tough line this afternoon on the proposed merger between Comcast Corporation and NBC Universal in opening statements at a hearing on implications of the proposed merger this afternoon, before recessing for several floor votes.

The hearing, before the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights Subcommittee, was the second on Capitol Hill today. This morning, a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee also heard about the proposal.

In December, Comcast announced it would buy NBC from its current parent, General Electric. The deal, which would combine one of the largest cable providers with one of the largest content companies, has the potential to reshape the media industry. Consumer groups and smaller cable and content companies have raised concerns about the deal. Approval of the deal is in the hands of Executive Branch regulators.

The Senate subcommittee’s chairman,  Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), said the deal raised serious concerns. “Should the agencies decide to allow this merger,” Kohl said in an initial statement, “we believe it is essential they insist on strong conditions to protect consumers.â€� ”

The subcommittee’s ranking Republican,  Orrin Hatch of Utah, also said that the deal could harm consumers. A merger  between a leading video distributor and a leading content provider could result in “a significant foreclosure of competition,” he said. And, Hatch warned, there was a possibility that Comcast could “use NBC’s content as a weapon” against rivals.

In his remarks, Kohl outlined four areas of concern: Comcast would be able to deny or raise the price of “must have� NBC programming for rivals; Comcast could move NBC’s free programming to cable channels; the merger could make it more difficult for independent programmers to get onto Comcast distribution; and whether the union of the two giants could hurt the still nascent market for online video.

The public commitments Comcast outlined in announcing the merger, Kohl said, only provided a “starting point” to any discussions.

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), who previously worked for NBC, said he did not trust the company’s word based on his previous career. If an independent producer wants NBC to carry his show, Franken said, it is routine practice for the network to demand part-ownership of the show. That was “completely contrary to what the networks said they would do” in prior negotiations, he said.

The tough line from both sides of the aisle contrasted this morning’s hearing on the House side of the Capitol complex, where lawmakers largely raised localized concerns about network affiliates in their districts, and concerns about net neutrality issues.

Lawmakers split along largely partisan lines, with Democrats urging caution and Republicans arguing that the deal does not raise serious antitrust concerns.

The transaction, “if approved, could trigger dramatic changes in the way consumers access video programming, the way independent programmers distribute their works, and in the way all video distributors compete for customers,” said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who chairs the full Energy and Commerce Committee, in his initial remarks.

The proposed joint venture raised “legitimate concerns” about the leverage the combined firm might be able to exercise over competitors and consumers, said Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.)

But Republicans on the panel urged regulators at the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission, who have to sign off on the deal, to conduct a speedy review. “There is little to suggest” that the combination “would seriously threaten competition in the media industry” said Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), who is the ranking member of the Communications, Technology and the Internet Subcommittee.

The opening statements seemed to suggest most legislators were interested in what kinds of conditions might be imposed on the deal, rather than whether the deal should be blocked outright. The hearing should explore “whether there is the potential for consumer harm, and whether the merger should be conditioned,” said Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) who chairs the subcommittee.

In his remarks, Waxman also said that, while the transaction did raise questions about its impact on independent producers and the future of online television, the deal could also benefit consumers.

Lawmakers split along largely partisan lines at a hearing before a House Commerce subcommittee this morning that is exploring the proposed deal from Comcast Corporation to take a majority stake in NBC Universal. Democrats are urging caution and Republicans members are arguing that the deal does not raise serious antitrust concerns.

House members completed their opening statements in the crowded hearing room and then recessed to complete several votes on the House floor before hearing from witnesses.

In December, Comcast announced it would buy NBC from its current parent, General Electric. The deal, which would combine one of the largest cable providers with one of the largest content companies, has the potential to reshape the media industry. Consumer groups and smaller cable and content companies have raised concerns about the deal, and Congress is holding two hearings today featuring Comcast and NBC chiefs. This afternoon, the Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to hold a similar hearing.

The transaction, “if approved, could trigger dramatic changes in the way consumers access video programming, the way independent programmers distribute their works, and in the way all video distributors compete for customers,” said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who chairs the full Energy and Commerce Committee, in his initial remarks.

The proposed joint venture raised “legitimate concerns” about the leverage the combined firm might be able to exercise over competitors and consumers, said Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.)

But Republicans on the panel urged regulators at the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission, who have to sign off on the deal, to conduct a speedy review. “There is little to suggest” that the combination “would seriously threaten competition in the media industry” said Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), who is the ranking member of the Communications, Technology and the Internet Subcommittee.

The opening statements seemed to suggest most legislators were interested in what kinds of conditions might be imposed on the deal, rather than whether the deal should be blocked outright. The hearing should explore “whether there is the potential for consumer harm, and whether the merger should be conditioned,” said Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) who chairs the subcommittee.

In his remarks, Waxman also said that, while the transaction did raise questions about its impact on independent producers and the future of online television, the deal could also benefit consumers.

We will update this story as the hearing continues.

Attorney General Eric Holder speaks at the CRS 45th Anniversary (DOJ)

The Attorney General can add another honor to his growing list.

Fresh off of his nomination as finalist for Mustached American of the Year, GQ magazine has named Eric Holder the 13th most powerful man in DC.

Sadly, Holder is only the third most powerful mustachioed politico, behind Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who shares the 11th spot with bearded Rep. David Obey (D-Wis.), and President Obama’s adviser David Axelrod at the 6th spot on the list.

GQ credited Holder for his independence from the president, noting:

Holder has pushed back against the wishes of his own team, fighting CIA director Leon Panetta’s attempts to quash the release of the interrogation records and going forward with an investigation, against Obama’s wishes, into the alleged torture that took place during the Bush years. While critics on the left say he’s not going far enough, it’s nice to have a DOJ paying attention to the rule of law again.

The men’s magazine compiled the list to commemorate just how different things in Washington appear to be nine months into the Obama administration. “A whole new power structure has emerged,” the magazine says.

Holder comes in behind super-lobbyists Karen Ignagni (America’s Health Insurance Plans) and Billy Tauzin, (Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America), who jointly occupy the 12th spot, and ahead of House Finance Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), at the 14th spot.

Robert Mueller (FBI)

Holder was not the only Justice Department luminary on the list. FBI Director Robert Mueller took the 19th spot, for his efforts to “build a more nimble intelligence division.”

Robert Barnett, attorney at Williams and Connolly LLP, took the 44th spot. Barnett has represented a veritable who’s-who of DC luminaries as they leave office to write their book, earning seven-figure advances for Sarah Palin, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush and Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Who’s at the top of the heap? The cleanshaven Rahm Emanuel, of course.