To most ears, low-power radio -- 10- or 100-watt stations with a broadcast range of a few square miles at most -- sounds like a cheap, easy and democratic way of giving communities a small but potent voice on the dial.

But now, 21 months after the Federal Communications Commission first proposed creating a new brand of low-power FM radio stations, the initiative is fighting for its life.

It's being smothered at the request of broadcasters during a last-minute closed-door horse-trading session on Capitol Hill.

And holding the pillow on the patient's head is a surprising pair: the powerful National Association of Broadcasters -- and noncommercial National Pubic Radio.

The unlikely alliance had been maneuvering a bill through Congress that would effectively kill low-power radio. But unable to get it passed, the alliance is now working to attach its bill as a rider to one of the nation's 13 must-pass appropriations bills -- a legislative end-run that would turn the bill into law without Senate debate or a straight up-or-down vote on the merits.

Why the rush? Without last-minute congressional action to stop it, the FCC could begin doling out low-power radio licenses. And once low-power stations run by local schools, churches and advocates are on the air it will be politically uncomfortable for Congress to yank them back off.

Especially if the first stations disprove the broadcasters' central claim: that low power will produce serious signal interference.

The unfolding low-power showdown is marked with a host of bitter antagonisms, some of them surprising. First, die-hard grass-roots activists are squaring off against Washington's most feared lobbying group, the National Association of Broadcasters.

Second, a cat fight among public-media advocates is raging, with low-power proponents accusing the feel-good nonprofit NPR of selling out its principles in order to protect its spot on the dial.

And then there's the delicious prospect of an intra-GOP squabble, featuring low power's No. 1 fan, Arizona Sen. John McCain, chairman of the Senate Commerce Commission, facing off against two big-broadcasting allies: Minnesota Sen. Rod Grams and New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg.

Can the NAB roll the powerful McCain, one of the most popular politicians in America? "That's very unusual, and risky," warns Sen. Bob Kerry. The Nebraska Democrat recently teamed up with McCain to publicly urge his colleagues not to attach a low-power rider to any appropriations bills.

But the closing days of Congress are notoriously unpredictable. Right now, the NAB's allies are keeping their rider plans quiet; they don't want public debate on the issue to arouse low-power activists. "We are cautiously optimistic," says Steve Behm, spokesman for Grams.

Grams' bill -- designed to throttle low-power radio -- is officially called "The Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000." Low-power opponents use language like that because of their contention that the new stations will cause interference with existing FM outlets. The FCC, no fan of underground media -- it has been fighting pirate radio stations with a heavy hand for years -- has dismissed these technical concerns.

Grams touts his bill (and would-be rider) as a compromise. It would allow the FCC to test low-power stations, but only in nine markets. Then, independent technical analysts -- from an as-yet-undetermined body -- would report back to Congress next year on interference issues. Congress would then have the final say. How congressional legislative staffers would be better able than FCC engineers to interpret analyses of radio spectrum management is not quite clear.

Even if it gives low power the go-ahead, Congress would then have to restart the authorization process -- with the NAB fighting it at every turn. And if by next year there's a Republican president who has appointed a new FCC chairman, low power's chances of survival would likely be zero.

"Grams' bill is an attempt to kill low-power FM radio," says Jim Farrell, spokesman for Paul Wellstone, Grams' Democratic senatorial colleague. "It's [a] remarkable [position] for a senator from Minnesota, where 63 groups have applied for licenses, one of the highest in the country."

Meanwhile, President Clinton remains opposed to the proposed rider. It's an "ill-conceived attempt to weaken community radio," says White House press secretary Jake Siewart. Vice President Al Gore also supports low-power stations, since they would "give voice to the voiceless," says spokesman Doug Hattaway.

But as the days pass, practical concerns boost the rider's chances. Appropriation bills pile up and nervous members of Congress become desperate to return home and campaign. Thus the likelihood increases that several appropriation agreements will be combined into a massive omnibus bill. With final omnibus votes often taken before the bills are read by many members, the chances of riders slipping through increase.

"The question of the day is how far will NAB's political allies go to circumvent the process," says Mike Bracy, executive director of the Low Power Radio Coalition.

Now playing: Read all the recent movie reviews by Salon's critics