Questions for the "Chill Out" crowd
By krempasky Posted in FEC — Comments (2) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
1) Despite the obvious value of an endorsement, have you ever seen a contribution reply device in the middle of a New York Times op-ed?
2) Would you like to choose between protecting yourself from lawsuits or submitting to FEC regulation?
3) Should there be a difference between one person writing a blog about their local smarmy politican, and three friends running the same blog as a collaborative?
4) Do you like the idea of anyone being able to file complaints against bloggers with the FEC?
5) Do you think bloggers - unlike ANY OTHER POLITICAL VENDOR - could or should be FORCED to disclose any payments from any campaigns? (keeping in mind, of course, that in EVERY other scenario - the burden of disclosure in the eyes of the law is on the person spending the cash, not the person getting the cash)
If you answered "No" to any or all of these, stay tuned - because despite some very early reports about the "hands off" nature of the proposed FEC rules, it just ain't so.
« Financing the General Election — Comments (6) | From the FEC hearing — Comments (4) »
Questions for the "Chill Out" crowd 2 Comments (0 topical, 2 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
In an opinion article on Thursday, Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said that "bloggers should be classified as journalists and given First Amendment protections."
Did the US Constitution get amended again by the Democrats when I wasn't looking. A lot of insite in one simple statement from the cnet story here.
Is there any transcript or audio tape online? Keep us informed.
But I do think the concern with the FEC is misplaced. I'm not sure the FEC has any choice but to adopt rules something like what they've proposed, GIVEN THE LANGUAGE OF THE BCRA and the court ruling. I don't think there is any fundamental difference between, say, blogs and talk radio, or blogs and people handing out fliers on the street. The judge has already ruled that the law prohibits the FEC from just saying "hands off the internet". They HAVE NO CHOICE but to put some kind of rules on the internet. (Of course, I think they should have appealed the decision, but that horse has already left the station, so we're stuck with it.)
And once you put any kind of campaign finance rules on the internet, you enter the regulatory morass we're all so (legitimately) worried about. But this is not a consequence of applying the BCRA to blogs. It is a consequence of applying the BCRA to American Citizens speaking about politics.