Political Bloggers Could Be Required To Register Or Face Jail Time

Information Week. ^ | January 17 2007 | Mitch Wagner

[jmc1969]

An outfit called GrassRootsFreedom.com is reporting that the U.S. Senate is considering legislation that would require political bloggers with readership over 500 to register as lobbyists. If they fail to register, they could face criminal penalties up to one year in jail.

"Section 220 of S. 1, the lobbying reform bill currently before the Senate, would require grassroots causes, even bloggers, who communicate to 500 or more members of the public on policy matters, to register and report quarterly to Congress the same as the big K Street lobbyists.

[Arizona Carolyn]

What is with Vittner?

[Ciexyz]

An outrage!

[arthurus]

CFR was the camel's nose. The rest of this is just a bit more of the camel then a little more. Freedom of speech and press is not under attack here in its essential parts, just that vulgar political speech (and press).

[arthurus]

I hadn't thought of it quite that way. You just turned on a little light.

[Ciexyz]

That law is sick!

[blondee123]

You'd think they'd spend their time going after child pornographers on the internet, but heck no, our senators have all gone nuts. They worry more about us freepers & what we're saying!

Like I've said before, the USA is looking more & more like the old USSR!!!!

[arthurus]

Democrats will almost certainly agree if they think the first targets will be the conservatives and Christians. Once that menace is taken care of they have no need of the internet and they know that some of their sites will be defined as not coming under the law and that the legislators who pass the law will also point out loopholes that only leftists ari in position to take advantage of. Look at how Mr. Soros is suddenly The Big Man in American political finance.

[tcrlaf]

"They worry more about us freepers & what we're saying!"

WE can actually hurt THEM..
A child Pornographer is simply acting within his God-Given right to abuse children (see Quran), and is no danger to the Congressman.

"Non-DNC approved speech cannot be tolerated, and must be stopped.

SEIG HEIL!!!
ABORTION UBER ALLES!
BIG TUNA FOREVER!

[AnnaZ]

`(17) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING- The term `grassroots lobbying' means the voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same.

Holy crap. These people are f*&$ing insane. Even a pathetic "FReep this poll" is illegal!

[Seaplaner]

Wanna bet Hillary is driving the issue?

I wouldn't take that bet!

And this is only PRE-election repression.

Can you even imagine the POST-election REPRESSION of a (gulp) President Hillary Rodham?

Josef Stalin's "Great Terror" might just take an historical seat.

ugh.

[conservative in nyc]

Perhaps it's vague (typical wording to allow abuse), but it seems to identify that "paid" applies to the attempt to influence over 500 people.

Yes, it does have to attempt to influence over 500 people. But the effort must still be paid.

Under the prior section (A) which you omitted, "Paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying" is defined as "any PAID attempt in support of lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to influence the general public or segments thereof to contact one or more covered legislative or executive branch officials (or Congress as a whole) to urge such officials (or Congress) to take specific action with respect to a matter described in section 3(8)(A)"

If I recall the commentaries on this correctly, the problem is that the amount paid is irrelevant - it could be one cent or a million dollars, and a person could be swept up in the reporting requirements as long as all other conditions are met. But the grassroots lobbying firm DOES have to receive income of, spend, or agree to spend at least $25,000 for lobbying efforts during a quarter.

Make no mistake, whether I'm right or wrong about the paid issue, this proposed legislation was a piece of crap the last two or three times it was proposed, and still remains a piece of crap. I remember the last time it was posted, I kept on reading it and commentaries on it thinking about what to post before becoming frustrated and utterly confused about what "evil" the law was supposed to ban.

What I ultimately came away with is that Congresscritters seem not to like to get phone calls from those pesky folks who elected them.

[DocRock]

Good Catch Bump

[txhurl]

Exactly. Too scared to turn off their fax machines and fire their secretaries who are burdened with fielding calls from THEIR CONSTITUENTS!!

[AnnaZ]

I read too quickly... allegedly, that's perhaps exempt, however, no one with a political job, or if we had one, could ever encourage others to do anything political.

Too much language, too much bull$hit, too little free speech.

I hate big government.

[SAJ]

A fine formulation. VERY nicely done!

Sadly, although you're spot on, the would-be tyrants in the Regress simply have no intention of listening to anything other than their, frankly megalomaniacal, lust for power.

[SiliconValleyGuy]

Freeper joanie-f posted a great essay on this a couple days ago:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1767098/posts

[SiliconValleyGuy]

Excellent info. Thanks.

[OrioleFan]

Blogs are nothing more than meeting places to discuss the issues of the day. In colonial times they published items in the town square where people met and discussed. Regulation of blogs is a non-starter for people who like their personal freedoms. Democrats have their free love, we have our free association.

[Molly T.]

I echo your question...what the heck is this Vetter thinking? And now why is he trying to get Section220? removed? I don't pretend to be very smart on this stuff, so will someone really explain this? All I know is I'm mad as heck, wondering what our gov.is going to do next...just what will be the next "protected" right that we're guaranteed under the Constitution and Bill of Rights that they will go after now? I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of the game of politics, but I darned well know when our way of life and our beloved country is getting sold down the river by the very people who are supposed to be protecting us....our rights being taken away, our country being overrun by illegals, corruption in high places, corporations pulling the strings ......a nightmare.

[SAJ]

Excuse me?? Do I see a reference to a 'Critter or a Senator, and in the same post see the word ''principles''?

You've simply GOT to be kidding, right?