ASHINGTON, June 15 - In a direct challenge to federal limits on political advocacy, the National Rifle Association plans to begin broadcasting a daily radio program on Thursday to provide news and pro-gun commentary to 400,000 listeners.Posted on 06/15/2004 8:16:40 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
|
|
ASHINGTON, June 15 - In a direct challenge to federal limits on political advocacy, the National Rifle Association plans to begin broadcasting a daily radio program on Thursday to provide news and pro-gun commentary to 400,000 listeners.
The group says its jump into broadcasting with its program, "NRANews," means that it should be viewed as a media organization that does not have to abide by provisions of a sweeping campaign finance law from 2002. That law stops organizations from using unregulated "soft" money to buy political advertising that directly attacks or praises federal candidates in the weeks before federal elections and primaries.
The N.R.A. says its three-hour program constitutes news and commentary, not advertising. As a result, when other advocacy groups are required to stop running political commercials, "NRANews" intends to continue broadcasting its reporting and commentary against politicians who favor gun control to Nov. 2.
"The great thing about America is there is no test about the right to provide information to the American public," the executive vice president of the association, Wayne LaPierre, said in an interview this week. "There is no government licensing of journalists. Tom Paine was free to pamphlet. So are we."
The association challenged the new law, but the Supreme Court upheld most of its provisions.
Mr. LaPierre said the program, to be broadcast on Sirius satellite radio, would be a step toward a larger media enterprise. The organization is looking to acquire radio stations in the Midwest, the Rockies and the South, Mr. LaPierre said.
It operates a news-oriented Web site, NRANews.com, and publishes magazines that reach its nearly four million members.
The new move is likely to set off a broad debate over what is a media company. Experts in campaign finance said the plan could open a major loophole in the law, which was intended to reduce the influence of money and special interest groups.
"If the N.R.A. is successful at this, we will definitely see other groups explore going down the same road," said Larry Noble, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics and former general counsel to the Federal Election Commission.
Building a media enterprise can be expensive, but satellite radio offers the rifle association an instant means of reaching listeners nationally. Sirius, one of two nationwide satellite radio networks, offers 110 channels to its 400,000 subscribers, who pay about $13 a month. Company officials project that it will reach one million listeners by the end of the year. The company declined to comment on Tuesday about the plan.
Advocates of gun control sought to play down the plan, contending that it was simply to impress Republican allies of the group. The opponents questioned whether the association had the money to build a network, noting that its ambitious plans had fizzled in the past. In 2000, the association announced to much fanfare a proposal for a theme store and restaurant on Times Square. Nothing came of that plan.
"I think they are really just trying to show the Republicans that they are going to be able to do something at election time," said Robert A. Ricker, a former lobbyist for the gun industry who is a consultant to a gun-control group, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. "It's a lot of hype, but I don't think there will be substantial content."
Under the new campaign finance law, groups are no longer allowed to use soft money to buy radio or television spots that advocate or oppose candidates within 60 days of a general election or within 30 days of a primary or a national political convention.
The law exempts media companies, allowing them to report on, analyze and even endorse federal candidates at any time. Mr. LaPierre said that after an exhaustive analysis, lawyers for his group had concluded that it would become eligible for the exemption after it had begun to broadcast its program.
"What we're doing is no different from what Rush Limbaugh, Howard Stern or Air America with Al Franken do," Mr. LaPierre said.
He said the program would probably not endorse a presidential candidate but would examine records on gun issues.
Some experts in campaign finance said if the program was regularly broadcast on a commercial network and if the association did not pay for the time, it would have a strong chance of withstanding legal challenges.
"If they are broadcast by a network, they would be much like a syndicated newspaper columnist," Jan Baran, a Republican campaign finance expert at the law firm of Wiley, Rein & Fielding in Washington, said. "They should be in no different position than George Will or Mark Shields."
Officials of the association said Sirius was providing time free. A spokesman for the network said it did not pay to acquire many programs, but he declined to give details, saying they were in private contracts.
Bob Bauer, a Democratic expert on election law, said the claim to a media exemption would almost certainly be challenged.
"It smells like, and it looks like, a complete circumvention of the law," Mr. Bauer said.
He argued that the real objective might be to goad campaign watchdogs or gun-control groups to challenge N.R.A. actions. Such a challenge could provide a way for the association to attack the campaign finance law itself, Mr. Bauer said.
Mr. LaPierre said the foray into broadcasting would not affect the activities of the association's lobbying unit and political action committee, which spent nearly $17 million in the 2000 elections. The committee endorsed George W. Bush in 2000 and is widely expected to do so again this year.
Its program will be broadcast live from 2 p.m. until 5 p.m. on Sirius Channel 126 and rerun the next morning from 6 until 9 on Right Channel 142, the group said.
Federal law requires broadcasters to provide opposing candidates equal opportunity to buy advertising time. Those rules would not apply to the rifle association unless it actually acquired a radio station, experts in election law said.
The radio program, identical to the association's Internet program, is produced by eight employees working out of a modern studio in Alexandria, Va. The host is a former radio talk show personality from Oklahoma City, Cam Edwards.
A recent program featured the association's senior correspondent, Jeff Johnson, reading reports on a car bombing in Iraq and a gun-control law in Ohio. That was followed by an interview with Mr. LaPierre in which he described Senator John Kerry as "the quintessential two-faced candidate."
After the program, Mr. LaPierre dismissed critics who contend that the program will be nothing more than propaganda.
"There are 90 million gun owners in America," he said. "And a lot of them don't believe they are getting accurate news from the media."
527s are okay, since Soros is funding them. But the NRA's radio show is bad because? Seems like legal to me.... As it should be....
Didn't think so.
C'mon, NRA bashers. Bring it on.)
I scrolled through it but I couldn't find mention of Air America or Move On. I guess it's only controversial if it's the NRA.
Not that they'll listen, but I'm going to send them a note telling them that this NRA member thinks they need a daily webcast feed of the program from the NRA website.
Isn't it amazing the balls of the NY Times worrying about "advocacy"? Defending the 2nd amendment is not advocacy.
First Amendment? What First Amendment?
Second Amendment? What Second Amendment?
Seems to me the Liberals don't think the First Amendment applies when "advocating" to support the Second Amendment. They are wrong.
Except for the New York Times and CBS "News", one must suppose.
Wait until they get aload of the Second being used to enforce the First. That will not make their day, but if they don't mend their ways, that day might come.
Yep. If they really wanted to be honest about THEIR motives, they'd change their motto to "All the socialist advocacy that's fit to print". I'm not sure when they left the journalism business, but it had to be sometime shortly after WWII.
What, the NRA is doing this?
Gee whiz, I thought the only thing the NRA was good for was to sell out our Constitutional rights, and climb in bed with the gun manufacturers?
I mean, isn't that what the disgruntled few are always telling us? That only Gun Owners of America did any "real" good for our cause? (And don't get me wrong - this is not an attack on GOA, a group that I have the greatest respect for)
Or "KeepandBearArms"? - how come KABA didn't do this first?
Could it be that the NRA really IS the most effective voice of gunowners in this country?
[/sarcasm]
Thanks for posting this. You saved me some work. BTTT
Besides its ILA and PVF, guess who could use a donation?
US Constitution, Amendment I: "Congress shall make no law [] abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
There are NO LIMITS on Advocacy! With the passage and rulling that allows the CFR Act the Congress, the President and the Supreme Court ALL erred. The First Amendment is clear and unambiguous. The Federal Charter provides no warrant to allow any such limits to be made law and specifically forbids such laws.
It's too bad SCOTUS can't read simple English, what a wasted education.
CFR is an absolute outrage to the first amendment. But I have a different question: can someone offer an opinion or point me to some material explaining the issues surrounding federalism and the second amendment?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.