Bloggers Avoid Federal Crackdown on Speech

InklingBooks writes "Redstate has a chilling description of the FEC's original March 10 proposal to regulate political speech on the Internet. It would have been a 'regulatory minefield for bloggers' and may yet return." CNet has a view of this earlier language as well. It's important to note that the regulation has changed much since the initial draft. The FEC began consideration of more developed regulation language on Thursday. From the article: "So, the original attempt to regulate started with the premise that everything was to be regulated except that with limited distribution or on password-protected sites."

Comments

Interesting ediorial from WSJ

[Cutie Pi]

The Wall Street Journal had an editorial about this topic on Wednesday:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.ht ml?id=110006458

I'm surprised that /.ers are just now hearing about it.

The Sky! The Sky is falling!

[C10H14N2]

There are plenty of very good reasons they're tackling the issue and if you bother to read the related documents, it is quite clear they are attempting to draft rules that impact only coordinated, primarily directly paid, activity--and even then, they're simply requiring the campaign connections to be disclosed and, when appropriate, reported as contributions.

Use DownsizeDC.org to notify your representatives

[Mike]

Sign a petition and send a letter to your representatives easily using DownsizeDC.org.

Re:The first amendment would override

[brianber]

I believe the court already ruled the McCain-Feingold act constitutional in a suit.

You sir, are correct. The SCOTUS did indeed rule that the Incumbant Protection Act's restrictions on paid political advertising are indeed NOT in violation of "Congress shall make no law..."It had to be the only time in history that the ACLU, NRA, and Unions were on the same side. As a result of that ruling, I would be very surprised if bloggers can keep their right to free speech.

I pressed Virginia 18 months ago on issue

[michaelmalak]

From my blog entry Virginia blogs barred from mentioning local candidates:

In response to the following question:

Now that the Fairfax County Supervisor candidates are announced, if I provide an opinion on my blog that is negative or positive about what an incumbant Supervisor has done, would that require me to file a disclosure report pursuant to 24.2-910?

I received the following response:

If the total aggregate of the independent expenditure is in excess of $200 and the expenditure is made to influence the outcome of an election for public office and if any material is published to the public referring to a candidate by name, description, or other reference, advocating the election or defeat, setting forth his position on any public issue, voting record, or other official acts, or otherwise designed to influence individuals to cast their votes for or against a candidate.

You must file a Statement of Organization and disclose the independent expenditure on a contributions and expenditures disclosure report.

The "Paid for by" and "Authorized by or Not Authorized by" Statements would apply as well.

Rise' Miller
State Board of Elections
Campaign Finance Division