Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House Defeats Bill on Political Blogs
Guardian Unlimited ^ | Thursday November 3, 2005 | JIM ABRAMS

Posted on 11/02/2005 6:24:06 PM PST by livesbygrace

WASHINGTON (AP) - Online political expression should not be exempt from campaign finance law, the House decided Wednesday as lawmakers warned that the Internet has opened up a new loophole for uncontrolled spending on elections.

The House voted 225-182 for a bill that would have excluded blogs, e-mails and other Internet communications from regulation by the Federal Election Commission. That was 47 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed under a procedure that limited debate time and allowed no amendments.

The vote in effect clears the way for the FEC to move ahead with court-mandated rule-making to govern political speech and campaign spending on the Internet.

Opposition was led by Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass., who with Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., championed the 2002 campaign finance law that banned unlimited ``soft money'' contributions that corporations, unions and individuals were making to political parties.

``This is a major unraveling of the law,'' Meehan said. At a time when Washington is again being tainted by scandal, including the CIA leak case, ``it opens up new avenues for corruption to enter the political process.''

(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 109th; blogs; campaignfinance; fec; freespeech; hillary; internet; weblogs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last
To: rmlew
Tell me about it! AAARGGH!

CONNECTICUT

Democrats - DeLauro, N; Larson, N.

Republicans - Johnson, N; Shays, N; Simmons, N.

41 posted on 11/02/2005 7:05:13 PM PST by tsmith130
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Blennos
"campaign finance".... thanks again Sen. McCainus

Thank George Bush as well. He signed the bill into law."

I bring this up every time I get a phone call asking for a donation to the Republican Party. I haven't given them a dime since Bush signed CFR and am not likely ever to again.

42 posted on 11/02/2005 7:05:13 PM PST by Sam Cree (absolute reality - Miami)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: livesbygrace

Coming after me, Meehan? Let's get it on!


43 posted on 11/02/2005 7:05:48 PM PST by Dan from Michigan ("My Gov'nor don't got the answer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny

"I guess my blog will now become a newspaper....published yearly with updates available online."

Do you take campaign contributions?
Are you a 503c?

no and no? Then it doesn't affect you.

Moveon.org it affects.


44 posted on 11/02/2005 7:10:12 PM PST by KingKongCobra (The "Donner Party" can just go eat themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Leroy S. Mort

Emmerson NO? WHAT THE HECK! She is generally known for being an excellent Republican here in Missouri. Too bad I am not in her district or I would be giving her the business end of a phone call to complain about her restricting the first ammendment.

Thankfully Blunt voted yes.

This is a bad day.


45 posted on 11/02/2005 7:11:26 PM PST by BoBToMatoE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: livesbygrace; Congressman Billybob; Cboldt

Can one of you please explain what the 2/3rds majority thing is all about? Is that specific to CFR in general, or have they been instituting new rules lately?


46 posted on 11/02/2005 7:16:39 PM PST by Seamoth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130; nutmeg
I had hoped that Simmons would break ranks.
As a New Yorker, I'm happy that Vito Fossella vote the right way. However he represents Staten Island and I live in Manhattan.
47 posted on 11/02/2005 7:18:52 PM PST by rmlew (Sedition and Treason are both crimes, not free speech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Mayflower Sister
They are about revoking freedom of speech, at least of political speech. Make a public remark about this or that politician within, what is it, 90 days (now) of an election, and you get frog-marched to the pokey.

Porn, flag burning, Nazi parades are all protected speech though.

48 posted on 11/02/2005 7:19:06 PM PST by GregoryFul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GregoryFul

Bump


49 posted on 11/02/2005 7:20:28 PM PST by Yellow Rose of Texas (Separation of Church and State is a MYTH, read the First Amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Leroy S. Mort

That vote is one of the clearest indicators of conservative vs DEMs & RINOs there ever was.


50 posted on 11/02/2005 7:21:10 PM PST by hocndoc ( http://www.lifeethics.org Vote For Proposition 2 Nov 8 Defend law, not just marriage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: TSchmereL
Senator John McAnus?

That's the guy... along with Wuss Feingold, the POTUS, the SCOTUS.... way to put a stop to freedom of speech.

51 posted on 11/02/2005 7:32:02 PM PST by infidel29 ("We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid." --Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: KingKongCobra

"Then it doesn't affect you. "

So should I only be worried if it affects me?


52 posted on 11/02/2005 7:57:49 PM PST by flashbunny (Anybody want to trade Alito back in for Miers?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Seamoth

Apprently, it was brought up on what is called the "suspension calendar" which is designed primarily for noncontroversial bills, like naming post offices and requires a 2/3 vote to "suspend the rules and pass the bill."

My guess is that the Republican leadership wanted the bill to fail. Or otherwise, the Rules Comittee would not schedule the bill for a normal vote, so the sponsor had to resort to he suspension route. Either way the GOP leadership sabotaged the bill. Anyone surprised?


53 posted on 11/02/2005 8:02:36 PM PST by slyfoxvirden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: livesbygrace

If what McPain-Feingold started reaches its natural conclusion, we here on FR will only be able to discuss sports, trivia questions and whether fashion week in Paris/London/NYC met our expectations for the 90 days before every federal election.

The Internet will become what regular TV is, a mind numbing excuse for being alive while on the couch stuffing your mouth with soda and cheese chips.


54 posted on 11/02/2005 8:22:58 PM PST by RicocheT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sittnick

Sounds like we are becoming Communist China cracking down on its internet users.

But Soros can keep funding his poison. grrrrrr


55 posted on 11/02/2005 8:34:27 PM PST by victim soul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: livesbygrace
John F. Kennedy: "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

Well, they've gerrymandered and perfected vote fraud: there goes the ballot box.
They're working diligently to take away the soap box.
At this rate, there's only one box left.

56 posted on 11/02/2005 8:45:58 PM PST by Tench_Coxe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny

Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass. is a member of Moveon.org. (That should explain everything). He was on C-Span today and said so while on the floor protesting. It's on tape. It looked like there were all of six people in the audience listening, very strange. Don't they require a certain attendance as these bills are debated? Was everyone out playing golf on this beautiful day or what? This guy is a left-wing loon. How can anyone take this guy seriously? It's actually sad and embarrassing that Marty Meehan got to be an elected official.


57 posted on 11/02/2005 9:01:09 PM PST by khnyny (all glory is fleeting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc
That vote is one of the clearest indicators of conservative vs DEMs & RINOs there ever was.

And yet John Conyers and Cynthia McKinney vote "Yes". Very strange.

58 posted on 11/02/2005 9:03:20 PM PST by Leroy S. Mort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: RicocheT; All

No, it will simply turn FR into a Soviet style tea room where actual names of politcal parties and candidates will be substituted with nicknames, such as Babar or Francis, houses of congress as "master bedroom" for Senate as upper house and kitchen or parlor as "House of Rep" as lower house. It will be fun!


59 posted on 11/02/2005 9:12:54 PM PST by olde north church (First Council of Conservative Revolutionaries (FCCR))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: SmithL; livesbygrace

<< What 1st Amendment? >>

The one President ["RINO?"] Bush abrogated at the instant [During time he took off from protecting our nation's sovereign borders, criminalizing America's normal and ordinary business activities, (Sarbannes-Oxley) presiding over the worst-ever blantant corruption of and most-profligate-ever feral spending and appointing inept cronies to high office] he signed McCain/Feingold.

That First Amendment.

Blessings - Brian


60 posted on 11/02/2005 9:37:34 PM PST by Brian Allen (Patriotic [Immigrant] AMERICAN-American by choice - Christian and Aviator by Grace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson