Slashdot Mirror
Republicans Propose Bill To Impose Fines For Live-Streaming From House Floor (digitaltrends.com)
Likely in response to the 25-hour sit-in staged by Democrats earlier in 2016, protesting the lack of gun reform, House Speaker Paul Ryan has proposed new fines and ethics violations for House members that take photo and video from the floor of the chamber. Digital Trends reports: According to Bloomberg, the first violation will net violators a $500 fine, which will be deducted from member's paychecks. Second and subsequent violations will carry a steeper fine of $2,500 per incident. Not only that, any other incidents that may disrupt decorum could be sent to the House Committee on Ethics, potentially leading to sanctions. "These changes will help ensure that order and decorum are preserved in the House of Representatives so lawmakers can do the people's work," a spokeswoman for Ryan said in a statement. Taking photo or video had already been prohibited on the floor, but was never enforced. But after the sit-in, led by John Lewis (D-Ga.), Ryan called a recess, effectively ending the C-SPAN broadcast. That is when Democrats used their phones and took to social media. "The imposition of a fine could potentially violate both the First Amendment, as well as, the Speech and Debate clause, which creates extensive protections for speech by legislators," Chip Gibbons, who serves as the policy and legislative counsel for the Bill of Rights Defense Committee and Defending Dissent Foundation, told Digital Trends in an email. According to Gibbons, courts have already found that under certain circumstances, recording footage does fall under speech. "Given the public interest -- and inherently political nature of the act -- it seems likely that videos, photography, and live streaming from the House floor would also be found to be speech, and protected by the First Amendment," Gibbons said.
So much for transparency....
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
They've done it before... in fact that's exactly what this seems to be about.
They want the ability to impose a media blackout should something happen in the chamber they want to keep under wraps.
=Smidge=
Even assume that's not going to happen, it's a pretty disturbing proposal, especially considering it seems to be in response to this:
But after the sit-in, led by John Lewis (D-Ga.), Ryan called a recess, effectively ending the C-SPAN broadcast. That is when Democrats used their phones and took to social media.
So Democrats staged a public protest. Republicans shut down the broadcast. Democrats resorted to broadcasting online by streaming from their phones. Republicans respond by trying to make streaming illegal. That's pretty fucked up.
You know, "making Congress into a stage for grandstanding" includes shutting down the government and refusing to pay the country's debts just to spite a President from the other party.
I find it very hard to imagine how this could be an ethics violation, unless one considers the possibility that members of the House don't understand what the word "ethics" means -- or "violation" for that matter, given some members beliefs on rape.
If the members of the House have any "ethics" at all, you can be fairly certain that they either stole them from someone else, or received them from a lobbyist as a bribe.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!