[Freedom'sWorthIt]

All - thanks to ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas in post #52, we have the essence of the hearing on Cspan although it does not include Congressman Jordan’s questions, it points out exactly what is in this huge monstrosity of a dangerous bill. From The Institute for Free Speech.

https://www.ifs.org/expert-analysis/analysis-of-h-r-1-part-one/

I did an email from Sen. McConnell’s website to encourage him to definitely prevent this bill, HR1, from coming to the Senate Floor and to thank him (I know, I know) for his work to prevent the leftists in the House from succeeding with their determination to destroy our country.

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

Please go down to the Executive summary on this website of the Free Speech Institute’s analysis of HR 1.

Just a few of the provisions in this nightmare of a bill:

- Subject far more issue ads to burdensome disclaimer requirements, which will coerce groups into truncating their substantive message and make some advertising, especially online, practically impossible.

- Likely eliminate the ability of many employees to make voluntary contributions through employee-funded PACs, which give employees a voice in the political process with respect to issues that affect their livelihoods.

- Effectively prohibit many domestic subsidiaries, and perhaps most corporations with even a single foreign shareholder with voting shares, from making independent expenditures, contributions to super PACs, or contributions to candidates for state and local office, thus usurping the laws in more than half of the states that allow such contributions.

This appears to be a thinly veiled artifice to overturn Citizens United and to unconstitutionally accomplish by legislation what congressional Democrats failed to achieve by constitutional amendment in 2014.

- Disproportionately burden the political speech rights of corporations, thereby ending the long-standing parity in the campaign finance law between corporations and unions.

- Increase regulation of the online speech of American citizens while purporting to address the threat of Russian propaganda.

- Expand the universe of regulated online political speech (by Americans) beyond paid advertising to include, apparently, communications on groups’ or individuals’ own websites and e-mail messages.

- Make broadcast, cable, satellite, and Internet media platforms liable if they allow political advertising by prohibited speakers to slip through, thereby driving up the costs of political advertising, especially for online ads where compliance costs are relatively high.

Impose inflexible disclaimer requirements on online ads that may make many forms of small, popular, and cost-effective ads off-limits for (American) political advertisers.

THese are just some of the provisions.

Chilling.

[Fightin Whitey]

Thanks FW!

Really appreciate.

[laplata]

Thank you!

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Thanks. Nobody should think that the problems of interpretation of poorly written laws is limited to the courts. The deep state bureaucracy would gain power as well (recall obamacare regs are supposed to be 30 times as big as the original text of the law). Maybe the FEC would want to hire 1,000 or more new employees, not to mention the DOJ.

What's the best way to grow the bureaucracy? Pass laws that need "interpretation." The resulting regs would be likely to lean (or shove) toward the left.