Slashdot Mirror
Online Freedom of Speech Act Introduced in House
Fox Cutter writes "Today in the House of Representatives, Congressman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) introduced a companion piece of legislation to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid's bill (S.678) to exclude the Internet from the definition of 'public communication' in the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act of 2002." If the bill passes, this would free the internet from FEC regulation.
The chances of the government voluntarily passing up a chance to regulate the government is only slightly less improbable than them passing up a chance to solicit more taxes.
In short, this is a pr move; nothing to see.
"Your admirers in the street
Got to hoot and stamp their feet
in the heat from your physique" -King Crimson
What's to stop the creation of another internet-specific regulation, which can flex its muscle solely on internet publication without worrying about collateral damage?
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.
especially after all the attention blogs have been getting lately.
The short summary given in the article makes this out to be a very good thing. I understand how preventing the FEC from regulating the internet is a good thing but what's this about the internet not being considered public communication? It seems to me that the internet covers both public and private communication. Webpages without access control are certainly public, are they not? Also... what exactly does it mean for something to be considered public communication? I'm not terribly familiar with the specific laws involved but I assume this is saying that public communication must be regulated in order to protect the public at large. Definitely not something we want.
I believe the avarage senate seat now costs over one million dollars. The president raised over $60,000,000 of hard money. The days of going door to door, meeting people is over. The days of long talks about what you believe and why is over. The new 30 second soundbyte is in, and the negative attack ads.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
The Supreme Court ruling that the existing legislation was constitutional? The precedent has sadly already been set, that's why this bill is trying to lessen the damage.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
And if it had been introduced by a Democrat, you'd be singing it's praises from the rooftops.
"All hail the Democrats! The see the true power of free speech!"
Oh wait. It was introduced by a Democrat in the Senate.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. D-Nevada
The bill introduced by Hensarling is a companion bill in the House. Bipartisanship in action.
Perhaps... perhaps we shouldn't /. this as "good news". I know we all hate M$, and love linux, and hate sw patents... but maybe we should sit down a sec and think about what this bill is doing.
/. "hypocrisy is ok as long as it agrees with me" logic should take a back seat to common sense. Giving extremist political groups more room to shout their message for money is another thing we all think is "a bad thing(tm)" right?
The Internet is "not" a public communications medium, so... it's a cheese bagel?
This is not about free speech, free speech is letting me say what I think w/o going to jail. This is about the net as a political medium.
That said, I am not against this bill, but the
I disagree with the supreme court ruling that says $ = speech, because that implies rich people have a louder voice than poor people, which seems not so good.
The first rule of USENET is you do not talk about USENET.
If politics on radio and TV should be censored, then the Internet should be censored too.
The entire campaign finance law needs to be repealed. Not modified. Not limited. Repealed.
Restore freedom of speech before it's too late.
I'm still waiting for someone to show me where in the Constitution it says that freedom of the press is only allowed if what is being said it considered to be "fair" by the government. (the backers of the "Fairness Doctrine", which censors broadcast media that the government does not like, seem to think so). They must have a different Constitution. Any idea where I can get a copy of it?
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
This isn't a freedom of speech campaign, this is trying to get PAC money on the Internet and not allow restrictions. Basically it allows campaigns to do what they can't do now, pay for "free speech."
I don't see freedom in this. I can still blog away, as long as I am not accepting regulated campaign funds to do so. People bat this around like they are making us more "free" when all it does is allow the guys with money to influence our true freedom of speech.
This is like paying the New York Times to write a nice acticle about your campaign. The FEC doesn't allow that, nor should they allow money to influence one of the last bastions of true free speech.
Think about it people!!!!!!
D.O.U.O.S.V.A.V.V.M.
Republicans are generally against campaign finance reform, even though republican John McCain started this whole mess. Bush only reluctantly signed it.
What's more important is the slashdot mind-meld. I'm a Republican and a poster on Slashdot for only a few months. It is true that I sometimes cringe and laugh out loud at posts here. But that is the world we live in, and for every "Bush=Hitler" post there are many more with thoughtful criticisms of GWB that are worth reading and responding to. When people engage in such debate, there is at least a tacit level of respect between all parties concerned. When you debate enough Republicans, you realize that although you disagree with them, they are not vampires, and you can have them as friends and colleagues. Again, through debate, you realize that I'm not evil, that I don't run over kittens with my Hummer for fun, and that I love it that both I and the people who disagree with me completely can debate.
Oh yes, I also use Firefox. That at least will get me a good mod.
E = m c^3 Don't drink and derive E = m c^3
In my experience as a 37 year old American, the only time I've ever engaged in long talks with people about what I believe and why were occurred during the three years I lived in Washington, DC. People inside the Beltway talk about this sort of thing all the time. You go into a bar and instead of asking someone what their sign is, you ask them who they work for and what their party affiliation is. Then you start arguing politics. It's quite fun, actually.
But even though I took a lot of PoliSci in college and have worked in the nonprofit and in federal government, the days of long talks about what I believed and why never existed outside my time in D.C.. In my experience the only people in America who are truly interested in the truly deep details of politics are people inside the Beltway, who have a much more sophisticated view of politics than you might imagine, because in order to get things done, they have to know the details.
For the rest of America, politics is unfortunately either a yawner or an excuse to shout about deeply-held beliefs without ever investigating the details. Negative attack ads have been a staple of political advertising for as long as I can remember, and they just keep getting worse, per your statement.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ