Replies

For 60 days prior to an election, at least, the following holds true. The NRA can no longer print messages regarding candidate stances in it's jounals. It can no longer attach a sticker to the election issue, notifying it's members as to which candidate it endorses. The NRLC can no longer send out notices that inform it's members regarding what bozos protect infanticide.

Let me repeat this again for the last f$#%ing time: NO PRINT ADVERTISING OF ANY KIND IS FORBIDDEN BY SHAYS-MEEHAN. It is not forbidden for non-profits, it is not forbidden for for-profits, not for anyone or anything, beyond what the current law already states. The only kind of advertising forbidden by this bill is radio and television advertising by an independent, non-PAC group which engages in "express advocacy" as defined in S-M.

Unless you take the time to understand this, you will continue to mischaracterize the bill. The biggest problem with S-M is that it has an unconstitutionally broad definition of "express advocacy," which, ridiculously, includes any mention of any candidate's name in any broadcast ad 60 days before an election. It also has an unconstitutionally broad definition of "coordination" between groups and candidates.

Please take the time and understand what this bill does and what it does not do. It does not affect print or internet advertising. The proponents of S-M justify their intervention in television speech by arguing that all stations need a federal license, so they need to follow federal guidelines. This argument, as wrong as it is for television, cannot even hope to apply to the Internet, since the Internet is wholly unregulated.

Let me repeat this again for the last f$#%ing time: NO PRINT ADVERTISING OF ANY KIND IS FORBIDDEN BY SHAYS-MEEHAN. It is not forbidden for non-profits, it is not forbidden for for-profits, not for anyone or anything, beyond what the current law already states. The only kind of advertising forbidden by this bill is radio and television advertising by an independent, non-PAC group which engages in "express advocacy" as defined in S-M.

OK, where am I going wrong when I see this portion of the bill?

`(C) TARGETING TO RELEVANT ELECTORATE- For purposes of this paragraph, a communication which refers to a clearly identified candidate for Federal office is `targeted to the relevant electorate' if the communication can be received by 50,000 or more persons-- `(i) in the district the candidate seeks to represent, in the case of a candidate for Representative in, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress; or `(ii) in the State the candidate seeks to represent, in the case of a candidate for Senator.

I'm still lost in the middle of that damn bill, quit a few days ago and won't get back to it 'till later.

It appears it was the Sheas amendment, Hamend 417, that banned the 60 day express advocacy broadcast ads. They did that by amending the FCC act from the '30's. You're correct, it's definitely a broadcast thing.

I'm still trying to figure out what the other groups are talking about. They can obfuscate just as well as the bozos that wrote this law. It will take me a lot more time to assemble that jig-saw puzzle of a law together.