Should radio stations pay for music?

I ran across a news brief talking about musicians Sheryl Crow, will.i.am, Herbie Hancock and other testifying before congress their belief that radio stations should pay royalty fees for playing their music.
The musicians site other mediums — satellite radio, television and internet — that pay royalties for playing their music. The musicians feel radio should do the same.
Seems to me musicians may be aiming a shotgun barrel at their own big toe with this one.
If congress were to enforce such a plan, my guess would be that: A) radio stations would not pay for the music and, thus, stop playing artists music or B) stations would strike deals with record labels to get the cheapest content and thus, shut out those that don't play ball.
It's a difficult balance, because on one hand, musicians should be compensated for their work. It's tough to make a living off your art.
On the other hand, radio stations, despite the inherent evil of some conglomerates, would be hard pressed to pay artists for their music and their own employees. People would lose jobs. Stations would fold. Guarantee it.
It's a tough decision to make, and I'm glad I don't have to make it.