Posted on 03/10/2005 6:19:54 AM PST by Repeal
The Federal Election Commission will consider rulemaking to apply the Bipartisan Campaign Act to politics on the web sometime in March 2005. An FEC employee told me there will be a press release on March 17th or 24th. According to articles on Zdnet and Worldnet Daily, proposed regulations may require blog posters to register with the FEC, report expenditures at regular intervals, assign a value to hyperlinks and set contribution limits.
Do you want to familiarize yourself with terms like: political action committee (PAC), independent vs in-Kind donations, issue vs express advocacy, spending limits, reporting intervals and coordination with a candidate’s campaign, before engaging in political discussion on the web? And remember failure to comply with campaign finance laws is a felony!
This is America’s last chance to keep a vestige of freedom of speech, press and assembly once guaranteed by the 1st Amendment. Public input will be accepted via email, fax and snail mail so watch http://www.fec.gov for your opportunity. In the interim, write your Congressmen, www.house.gov/, and Senators, www.senate.gov/ , and demand legislation to exempt the internet!
Hugh Hewitt
http://www.hughhewitt.com/
Lions, and tigers and bears, oh my!
Many correspondents ask why I haven't rushed to join in the condemnation of the FEC's move to shut down the blogs. Answer: I have been teaching the First Amendment for a decade, and it isn't going to happen because it would be patently and obviously unconstitutional to classify the content of a political blog --which is essentially a cyber-newspaper-- as within the purview of the FEC. If I direct someone to Mark Kennedy's website and suggest a contribution to Mark Kennedy (give early and often!), there is no difference than if I had done so in a column in a newspaper or in a private letter. It is beyond the reach of the government, period. See Beldar for additional exposition. Then see my WorldMagazine column from this week, which holds up Mark Kennedy as a welcome candidate in the hunt for the U.S. Senate seat in Minnesota. Is the FEC going to regulate World as well. And ABC's The Note? And all of OpinionJournal.com, or just those parts that don't appear in print? Or would the rule be you can hint at the candidate you like but cannot expressly say so?
I think the conversation was useful, but not nearly as important as some think. Commissioner Smith's a very smart guy, and he got what he probably set out to get: An early warning to the FEC staff that it is silly beyond words to attempt such a thing. And blatantly unconstitutional.
Plus which, it is entirely unenforceable.
Heads up...
MCCAIN, FEINGOLD, WEINTRAUB TELL BLOGGERS NOT TO WORRY
National Review Online ^ | 3/9/05 | jim geraghty
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1360003/posts
Now when have they let a little thing like that stop them?
You enforce it by picking one or two high profile sites, and ruin the lives of the people who run it. Then everyone else "self complies".
Oh sure, that's like the Gov't bureaucrat that says, "I'm from the guv'ment and I'm here to hep you", yeah, "don't worry" my you-know-what.
They need to be watched like hawks.
That sure stopped illegal music sharing...... NOT!
"beyond the reach of the government"
NOTHING is beyond the reach of the govt.
The real issue is - are we going to sit here and let them ruin the internet like they have ruined most everything else.
Mischief of Anonymous Speech
"Anonymity tends to go hand in hand with mischief," he said. "Authentication tends to eliminate this mischief." I guess that is why federal campaign laws require independent expenditures, like political handbills, to have a disclaimer stating who paid for them.
Anonymity might promote the mischief of unseating incumbent politicians. In fact disallowing anonymity might have prevented America's founders from the mischief of creating a new nation! We should put an end to America's traditional mischief of anonymous political speech. King George would have liked the idea of stopping anonymous speech. He wanted every American printing press to have a unique number stamped on its platen, so every page could be traced to it's source.
FEC regulation of blogs could start the process by disallowing screen names .. or do you think that might chill participation?
That's how the IRS does it. And it won't necessarily be a site like this one. The reason is because There is enough of a network to spark revolt.
John Hancock purposely signed his name large on the Declaration to let King George know he wasn't afraid. For all the tough talk, many of the men who signed the Declaration suffered, and knew what would happen.
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.