Bradley Smith exposes anti-Constitutional FCC

[shanek]

http://news.com.com/The coming crac...3-5597079.html?part=rss&tag=5596640&subj=news

In just a few months, [Bradley Smith] warns, bloggers and news organizations could risk the wrath of the federal government if they improperly link to a campaign's Web site. Even forwarding a political candidate's press release to a mailing list, depending on the details, could be punished by fines.

Smith should know. He's one of the six commissioners at the Federal Election Commission, which is beginning the perilous process of extending a controversial 2002 campaign finance law to the Internet.

This is a very telling interview. Here's a few of the questions:

How can the government place a value on a blog that praises some politician?
How do we measure that? Design fees, that sort of thing? The FEC did an advisory opinion in the late 1990s (in the Leo Smith case) that I don't think we'd hold to today, saying that if you owned a computer, you'd have to calculate what percentage of the computer cost and electricity went to political advocacy.

It seems absurd, but that's what the commission did. And that's the direction Judge Kollar-Kotelly would have us move in. Line drawing is going to be an inherently very difficult task. And then we'll be pushed to go further. Why can this person do it, but not that person?

Then what's the real impact of the judge's decision?
The judge's decision is in no way limited to ads. She says that any coordinated activity over the Internet would need to be regulated, as a minimum. The problem with coordinated activity over the Internet is that it will strike, as a minimum, Internet reporting services.

They're exempt from regulation only because of the press exemption. But people have been arguing that the Internet doesn't fit under the press exemption. It becomes a really complex issue that would strike deep into the heart of the Internet and the bloggers who are writing out there today.

What happens next?
It's going to be a battle, and if nobody in Congress is willing to stand up and say, "Keep your hands off of this, and we'll change the statute to make it clear," then I think grassroots Internet activity is in danger. The impact would affect e-mail lists, especially if there's any sense that they're done in coordination with the campaign. If I forward something from the campaign to my personal list of several hundred people, which is a great grassroots activity, that's what we're talking about having to look at.

Senators McCain and Feingold have argued that we have to regulate the Internet, that we have to regulate e-mail. They sued us in court over this and they won.

If Congress doesn't change the law, what kind of activities will the FEC have to target?
We're talking about any decision by an individual to put a link (to a political candidate) on their home page, set up a blog, send out mass e-mails, any kind of activity that can be done on the Internet.

How can anyone keep denying that the BCRA and all of the other campaign finance "reforms" are anything other than a blatant violation of free speech?

Bradley Smith is a great politician. He's one of the rare few who understands the Constitution and works to defend it. We need more like him.

 

[DaChew]

Title of thread should read:

Bradley Smith exposes anti-Constitutional FEC

not:

Bradley Smith exposes anti-Constitutional FCC

Though, I suppose, it could be argued both ways.

 

[shanek]

Dang it, you're right...and that's the one thing I can't edit. Sorry.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I think it'll be funny when they get to the point that the FEC will have to read this message board and tally up the times someone says something in favor of or against a candidate, and then track them down and try to figure out the cost of labor and electricity and computer spent on the messages.

Hey kids! Vote Republican, or else illegal immigrants will gay-rape your kids while getting welfare!

That should be worth $ .000000000000001! More, if I put it on t-shirts.

 

[shanek]

I think it'll be funny when they get to the point that the FEC will have to read this message board and tally up the times someone says something in favor of or against a candidate, and then track them down and try to figure out the cost of labor and electricity and computer spent on the messages.

Hey kids! Vote Republican, or else illegal immigrants will gay-rape your kids while getting welfare!

That should be worth $ .000000000000001! More, if I put it on t-shirts.

More likely, they'd charge the Foundation. Which would really suck.

 

[Luke T.]

You know, gambling sites just get off-shore web addresses...

I wonder how Dean feels about this.


THis troubles me.

 

[Zep]

We have the same technical numb-nuts here trying to "regulate the Internet". They have no frigging idea how it works, and so they can't understand why they can't prosecute a Romanian webadmin putting Thai porn on a Russian webservice, with downloads paid into Swiss banks.

Luke, you would be so right - the VERY first move to avoid getting covered by any such laws would be to offshore the websites.