Blogs Bristle at FEC's Internet Political Speech Proposal (this affects you)

Captain's Quarters ^ | 3/4/05 | Captain Ed

[chiller]

Captain's Quarters has started this ball rolling:

March 04, 2005 An Open Letter To The United States Senate

To the honorable Senators McCain and Feingold, et al:

I have read with considerable dismay the effect that your recent lawsuit against the Federal Election Commission, upheld by Judge Colleen Kollar-Ketelly, will have on political speech on the Internet. I write a political media-watchdog blog, Captain's Quarters, which enjoys a not-insubstantial daily readership. No one pays me to do this; I operate my site and write on topics purely from personal convictions and a deep desire to improve the world around me and make the nation stronger. I can unequivocally say the same about my many colleagues in the "blogosphere", both liberal and conservative.

Now we understand from Bradley Smith, one of the FEC commissioners, that your lawsuit forcing them to regulate speech on the Internet will have the effect of turning our efforts into in-kind contributions, especially when we provide hyperlinks back to candidate sites for referencing their positions and excerpt text from their on-line documents. Hyperlinks allow our readers to check our references to ensure our accuracy and context, and perform the hygienic task of holding our politicians accountable for their campaign practices. All of this not only should fall under the protection of the First Amendment, but it should be the primary reason for the First Amendment -- to protect and encourage free political speech and foster genuine debate.

Your legislation and the accompanying lawsuit that forced the FEC to regulate Internet political speech threaten all of that. If my links to political sites such as Georgewbush.com and Johnkerry.com counted as contributions and I was forced to accept responsibility for the cash value that the FEC designated to them, I would have been charged with several misdemeanors and possibly felonies, as I provided many such links during the past election cycle. During this cycle, my blog published over 680 essays on the presidential election. In fact, I linked to Senator Kerry's site four times as often as President Bush's site, which would have meant to the FEC that I was a major contributor to his campaign -- when in fact I opposed Senator Kerry and supported President Bush. These regulations would have forced me to retain the services of a full-time accountant and retain an attorney to understand when and where I overcontributed. At the very least, the burden of proof would be on me to make the FEC believe that my blog does not constitute in-kind contributions subject to the limits imposed on both hard and soft money contributions.

The effect of this would have been to force me to shut down my blog, or convert it to something else. In fact, it would have caused me less legal heartache to convert my site to a porn blog and do nothing but post hard-core pictures all day long. In the twisted environment of the McCain-Feingold Act, that kind of website would enjoy greater First Amendment protection than my political speech, a result for which every single Senator should feel shame and outrage.

Each of you should read the Constitution you swore to uphold and defend, and reflect on the unequivocal language of our forefathers:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or 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."

We may debate about the effect of unregulated cash on our electoral system, but if this new FEC effort comes to pass, the only people debating will be the corporate-owned media and the politicians. The rest of us will have been effectively bound and gagged, unable to contribute in any way thanks to the efforts of those who fear their own constituents. You can be assured that none of us in the blogosphere will fail to recognize those who do not act to defend our rights to free and unfettered political speech, and regardless of political party, none of us will rest until those voices of repression are stripped of office by the voters they hold in such low regard.

I, for one, will not be daunted by your attempts to stifle us. My many friends and colleagues on both sides of the political aisle stand as ready as I to defend the Constitution. We demand a hearing on McCain-Feingold, with open testimony before the press and our colleagues, and we demand action to reform or repeal this dangerous and un-American muzzle on political speech.

We await your response, sirs.

Edward Morrissey Captain's Quarters

UPDATE: A lot of these e-mails have bounced back. Apparently, our public servants don't like direct e-mail and require people to hit their websites to send them messages. At Town Hall, they have a Web form set up to do this, but many of the autoresponses indicate that they will not reply to messages sent from constituents outside their state.

Here's where you can help me out. Please copy my letter above and paste it into a message with an introduction of your own and send it to both Senators from your home state. That way we can be sure that all 100 Senators not only see this letter but your endorsement of it.

Thank you for your continued support!

[Darksheare]

No need to feel bad about it, I don't exactly broadcast that it happened.

Yes, blunt object application to whining Dem cranium may actually benefit someone somewhere, at least in the long run.

Great, I'm sneezing and typo'ing more often than usual.

[MeekOneGOP]

Blogs Bristle at FEC's Internet Political Speech Proposal
(this affects you)

Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my General Interest ping list!. . .don't be shy.

[Seadog Bytes]

Thank you, Sir.

[Brad’s Gramma]

Unbelievable....

BTTT

[Fredgoblu]

So...these guys propose to regulate everybody's speech EXCEPT ABCCBSNBCCNN?!?!?!

[Friend of thunder]

Legislators on the left and right will favor this.

I am afraid you are correct.

[MamaTexan]

Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, from Paris, Jan. 30, 1787

"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.

Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much.

It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of the government."

Is it time yet?

[Happy2BMe]

FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND FREEDOM TO BLOG - ping.

(The FCC is being pressured by RINO John McCain to squash your ability to voice your political views on the world wide web.)

[GOPJ]

Thanks for the ping.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[BigSkyFreeper]

If I didn't know better I'd say John McCain was undermining every aspect of American life, especially the 1st Amendement.

[Fiddlstix]

BTTT

[Happy2BMe]

I don't call John McCain a RINO for no reason.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Me neither. I'm not one to mince words sometimes either.

[potlatch]

Thanks Happy, Meek pinged me too. This is something we will really have to raise an uproar about if it affects forums like this.

Once they get their foot into the blogs they'll keep going!

[SheLion]

(The FCC is being pressured by RINO John McCain to squash your ability to voice your political views on the world wide web.)

The Internet is driving the FCC and the FEDS nuts!  They are trying every way they can to "control" it.  But since it is the WORLD Wide Web, it's out of their control, IMHO.

[Happy2BMe]

We all know why any government begins to withdraw freedom of speech from it's citizenry.

We all know the purpose of it.

But did any of us think there would come a time in the USA that our own government would do it to us?

Removing our freedom of speech under the guise of 'protecting us' from terrorism is patently identical to taking our guns away from us to protect us from criminals, gangs, and thugs.

These two tactics have both been tried in recent modern history and proven catastrophic to world peace and stability.

Whether we lose the right to speak first or the right to bear arms first, both actions on the part of government would/will signal that the government no longer represents the people of this country, but some unknown or foreign entity crafting a method to squash our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Could it happen in the USA? Even under a Republican administration?

Stay tuned.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Excellent ping! I'm very glad to be on your ping list, and have frequently asked other ping meisters to take me off their lists, in part so it's easier to catch your's. FReegards....

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

"..But did any of us think there would come a time in the USA that our own government would do it to us?..."

"The internet needs a gatekeeper." Hillary Rodham Rodham [Clinton], paraphrase, during the Dark Ages of US Politics.

[Cold Heat]

Could it happen in the USA? Even under a Republican administration?

I am concerned, but I am not sure what is really going on here. They cannot be referencing simple hyper links, and are more likely concerned with contribution solicitations. And the associated paypal links and related rhetoric to help defeat yadda, yadda. They may be fishing about for suggestions.

To simply say that the Internet is exempt, because it is the Internet is not right either.

Frankly, I don't like any of it, and the Supreme court needs to take a look see at this, rather than allow the appeals courts to tinker with it.

If they cannot close the loopholes logically and legally, then they need to dump McStain/Finemess and give up trying to control money. Just require disclosure and back it up with immediate prison terms and be done with it.