Bipartisan Effort to Defend the Internet is Tomorrow
By Congressman Jeb Hensarling Posted in User Blogs — Comments (14) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
From the Diaries - hats off to Representatives Wynn & Hensarling- who show more honesty and committment to free speech in these three paragraphs then the reformers can muster in a weeks worth of talking points and op-eds. Now hit those telephones!
For those of you who are interested in tomorrow's vote on the Online Freedom of Speech Act (H.R. 1606), I wanted to make you aware of the following letter I just sent, with Representative Albert Wynn (D-MD), to each of our colleagues in support of the bill. Since the bill is being considered "under suspension of the rules," it needs to garner more than a majority of votes (two-thirds of the Members present and voting). So make your support for H.R. 1606 both loud and vocal!
Tomorrow the House will consider H.R. 1606, the online Freedom of Speech Act, which is identical to S. 678 introduced by Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid. This bill will protect citizen journalists, known as bloggers, from the heavy hand of federal regulation.
The Online Freedom of Speech Act does not promote soft money or weaken any existing campaign finance regulations. Rather, it recognizes that online political dialogue enhances public debate and should be allowed to flourish. New technologies will continue to make it easier for Americans to be active in politics. In a country where only 60 percent of eligible adults vote, we cannot afford to allow Federal Election Commission (FEC) to burden political participants with arbitrary and cumbersome rules.
If the FEC imposes any regulatory scheme on the Internet, bloggers will be in legal jeopardy. Only those bloggers who can afford to hire lawyers will remain active, and our democracy will suffer. I urge you to defend First Amendment rights on the Internet and support H.R. 1606 on Wednesday.
We're making our calls from the DailyKos side of the world. What are y'all doing?
if our federal government would just respect the 1st amendment.
Rocket science, this ain't.
Already posted a reminder on my blog; already emailed my congressional represetative; already emailed both Senators regarding the Senate version.
McCain-Feingold delenda est.
How many times have we seen a news photo in a local paper with a candidate standing at their own portable podium, with something like "WWW (dot) SMITH-GOV-04 (dot) ORG" on the face of the podium, and on banners above, and on audience signs, and everywhere around the candidate? That's pure content-free political advertising. You can't find advertising any more blatant, outside a NASCAR race, but it's "news" and totally exempt.
The sound bite we're hearing is that this is about free speech, but perhaps there is more to it. Why are they in such a rush to bring this bill to a vote? Let's make sure this isn't a bipartisan effort to protect a cash cow.
I still don't get why this is supposed to be good.
Is there any effort to mention what the Internet is being defended against? It's McCain-Feingold.
Is there any effort to mention that McCain-Feingold was completely ineffective at keeping money out of campaigns to begin with?
Is there any effort to attack the root of the problem rather than a band-aid that will further protract the problem?
I believe this bill should absolutely be stopped. McCain-Feingold needs to be put to the test when the FEC attempts to regulate free speech during the election season, and it won't be if this passes.
We absolutely need to see what happens, as blogs shut down in fear, as people wonder what's legal to say, and people see that McCain-Feingold is completely ridiculous.
Call you representatives, tell them principles and results matter, not intentions and rhetoric. Tell them to VOTE AGAINST HR1606, and get to work on repealing McCain-Feingold.
While we're at it, why don't we make absolutely no reforms to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid which are scheduled to consume the entirety of today's budget by about 2040? And then, the American people will know just how expensive those programs are and then we can work to repeal them. Until 2040, we can just tell our children and grandchildren that "principles and results matter, not intentions and rhetoric" (so sorry but no investment-based retirement accounts) and wait until it all explodes. Nice theory of governance. Look, many of us want to repeal McCain-Feingold, but that doesn't mean we ought not to take small steps in the direction of freedom.
But I don't see how it's enforceable. Bloggers tend to be a rather anarchic lot on the average, and they--particularly on the left side of the aisle--have a tendency to do the equivalent of sticking their tongue out at laws that infringe upon what they view as free speech issues. See, for instance, the defiant linking to companies that have threatened litigation over links, deliberate flouting of censorship, et al.
If this passes, watch for blogger civil disobedience en masse. They'll practically be salivating for a test case to bring before the SCOTUS.
If this passes, watch for blogger civil disobedience...
H.R. 1606 protects bloggers from the regulatory process; it doesn't subject them to it.
But there is significant concern that, as written, it will actually be worse than the current status quo.
Actually - HR 1606 is the status quo, of sorts - it turns back the clock to 2004, during which life was calm and happy under an idential exemption from the FEC - that exemption was bounced in court - this law restores it.