In this age of change and uncertainty, the great leaders of our nation find themselves faced with a laundry list of pressing issues which, if handled incorrectly, could bring our nation to its knees. On this list, one can find critical concerns such as climate change, economic recession, terrorism, and television.

Wait, television?

With the anticipated conversion from analog to digital television looming, Congress finds itself grappling with the responsibility of making the transition process as smooth as possible. Though originally scheduled to take place Feb. 17, legislation has been pushed through Congress to extend the conversion deadline to June 12, reports the New York Times.

Apparently, the legislature is concerned that not all Americans have upgraded to digital television, so converting on the scheduled date would deprive these people of their natural rights to life, liberty and reality TV.

Granted, roughly $1 billion has already been spent on a massive information campaign to prepare the public for the upcoming conversion, so there is really no reason why people who value their TV viewing shouldn’t already be ready for the switch.

Additionally, under the proposed economic stimulus package, an additional $650 million would be spent by the government to help the remaining people who haven’t yet upgraded to digital.

Originally, I was confused about our government’s concern for people’s television viewing. After all, I thought TV was mere luxury, and therefore not worth all this legislative attention and spending. A recent Brazilian court case, however, explained everything to me.

According to Reuters, a man near Rio de Janeiro sued a major appliance retailer for not replacing his faulty television. He claimed “moral damages” caused by his inability to watch soccer games and the ninth season of “Big Brother.” The judge ruled in his favor, awarding him $2,600.

According to the judge, “In modern life, you cannot deny that a television set, present in almost all homes, is considered an essential good. Without it, how can the owner watch the beautiful women on ‘Big Brother,’ the national news broadcast, or a football game?”

So that explains it – I was wrong; television is not a luxury, but an “essential good.” And the government has a responsibility to protect the public’s access to things, like television, which are essential to our lives and well-being. Our government is not spending time and money on frivolous concerns, but rather protecting the public.

I’m sorry; I seem to be dripping sarcasm all over my keyboard, which is not only unprofessional, but also very difficult to clean off.

Honestly, I have no problem with television. It is useful for staying informed and entertained. However, it cannot be called an “essential good.” There are other ways than TV to stay informed. In fact, you are holding one right now.

There are also other options for staying entertained, such as reading, listening to music, watching movies, playing games, etc. There is absolutely nothing essential about TV. Anything television can do, other media can do just as well.

So why is the government treating television like an “essential good?” Congress is spending valuable time crafting legislation that will ensure no person is left out of the digital television revolution.

To give everyone an adequate chance to prepare for the conversion, $1 billion has already been spent. And even if converting to digital TV as scheduled denies some people the ability to watch their television, they are not losing anything crucial or irreplaceable.

Regardless of what the Brazilian judiciary says, television is not an “essential good,” and any attempt to treat it as such is irresponsibly wasteful. In treating TV as a necessity, the government is using time and taxpayer dollars to give a small group of people a second chance to obtain a luxury good, rather than attempting to fix more pressing concerns like our economy.