Redstate

By krempasky Posted in FEC — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

You can read the first part of this transcript here.

"On the other hand, you know, if we exempt those blogs, we’re essentially almost back...to...exactly what Judge Koller-Cotelli said we could not do, which is exempting the Internet. Because what’s a blog?"

The rest below the fold.

Transcript of FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith interviewed on NRA News, March 4, 2005 – Part II

NRAN: Alright....um, when, the Commissioners got together to discuss whether or not to appeal...what were some of the arguments for those who said, “Ahh, no, we’re not interested in appealing this?” Or can you get into that?

CS: Ah, um, you know I, I don’t know that I can really much get into, ahh...what, what occurs at closed sessions, again...

NRAN: ...OK...

CS: ...there’s the result, I think speaks for itself.

NRAN: Alright. Um, so we’re going to get these...we’re going to get a, a, um...a fairly good idea of what these proposals would be, you say later this month or early next month?

CS: Something will come out late, uh this month or early next. Ahh, if people check the FEC’s website, uh from time to time, it’s WWW.FEC.GOV they’ll see when it comes out. Of course, it will be published in the Federal Register, but the way the average citizen might see it is on the, on the website. And, I, you know I want to point out: Nothing is etched in stone here, and, I --- I’d be overly alarmist in saying, for example, that some of my colleagues who have, who favor going ahead with some regulation, have a, you know, “throw caution to the winds” approach or want to smother all the blogs. But I do think it’s fair to say that they...you know, that the judge’s decision requires us to regulate more. They did not feel it was worth appealing, and as we start getting into this, all of these issues are on the table, ah, and the regulatory community, people at the Democracy 21 and groups that have been saying for a long time that we need to regulate the Internet more heavily. So I just don’t know where this rule-making will go. You...

NRAN: ...I’m sorry...a sec...excuse me...did you say that a group called DEMOCRACY 21 was saying we need to regulate the Internet more heavily?

CS: Yeah, it’s not really [JG: ...yeah...] a group, it’s a couple [JG:....aah...] people and some big foundation grants [JG:..ok...], but they’ve been lobbying for that for some time.

NRAN: Ahh. ‘Cause democracy and regulation, typically you know, they’re, uhhh, they’re kinda..[ironically] opposite sides of the ideological spectrum there. Uh, alright, one more question for you Commissioner, and then I’ll let, uh, Jim ask another question if he, uh, has any...

It sounds to me like the FEC is getting ready to be put squarely between a rock and a hard place. You’re going to have these regulations that, uh, you’re going to have to impose, and yet, we know, just looking at it from a common-sense standpoint, that uh, actually enforcing this is going to be a, uh, a really difficult task. But if you don’t enforce it...then I mean, aren’t you going to have people, you know, calling for your head or for the other Commissioners’ heads? “And why...why wasn’t this blog over HERE...uh, you know, subject to the uh, the McCain-Feingold restrictions!?!” And the answer might be, “... because we didn’t SEE it!” But does that matter? I...I mean....

CS: Well that’s right, it opens the door for arbitrary enforcement, and what we’ll get is, you know, we’ll get lots of complaints. I mean, people read the Internet, and they’ll name a site, and, uh, you know of course sites if they’re well known at all, we’ll know who it is and you know who to go after. So this in will in some respect drive activity maybe further underground...The bloggers will all be sure not to reveal who they are or to go offshore or that sort of thing [chuckles], you know, if we actually got into that type of activity.

I expect that those problems will cause the FEC to proceed with some caution, but again, I just can’t guarantee it, and I know what the supporters of the bill have long said, they complained vociferously when we exempted the Internet from regulation...they sued us in court, and they won, and [now they’ve got their day?], and my understanding is that they may be doing a little backpedaling and saying, you know, “Oh, no, they really don’t want to regulate these things...” Well if that’s the case, that’s good to hear, and I wish that these congressmen who feel that way...would come forward and let us know that they think the Judge got it, got it wrong when she said the statute requires us to regulate this...[inaudible]

NRAN: Alright, I lied, I actually do have one more question.

CS: Mm. Hmm.

NRAN: Um, and that is the media exemption. Back when McCain-Feingold was passed initially, there was a media exemption. How will that factor into these new rules? Are, um, I mean...is there a way to blanketly exempt the blogs? Is there a way to say, ahhh, you know, a, a, website like NRANEWS.COM, which is doing a three-hour show every day is clearly media even though, ah, I believe under the definitions the media it seems to me you’re talking about a broadcast...uh...entity? Are, are we gonna be looking at redefining the media exemption?

CS: You know, it’s a tough issue...you know, the statute itself only applies the media exemption to periodicals and broadcast ads. So on its own, it wouldn’t seem to apply to books...it wouldn’t seem to apply to movies...uh, and yet I think most people agree that those things are protected by the First Amendment. Aah...blogs, it gets even more difficult! You know, how do you tell what’s a blog and what’s not? Some people want to apply to just [inaudible] [heavily ironic] LEGITIMATE media, what’s a REAL news agency??? And that, but that would be odd to me.

Under that test, for example, the Washington Post’s site or the New York Times’ site or the Wall Street Journal’s website would be protected, but your average citizen who goes out there and starts blogging would not be entitled to the media exemption. Ah, if the goal is of course to reduce the influence of Big Powerful Corporate Actors, I’m not sure why that proposal would make any sense at all. So it’s, it’s a big issue. On the other hand, you know, if we exempt those blogs, we’re essentially almost back...to...exactly what Judge Koller-Cotelli said we could not do, which is exempting the Internet. Because what’s a blog? I mean a blog is...um...in formal terms...really a blog is just a person’s website...

NRAN: Mmm hmm...

CS: ...some people post a lot on them, and some post a little, and some let other people post and some don’t, and...you know, what’s “What’s a blog?” How do you define that?

NRAN: Yeah, alright well is that something the FEC can, can look at, though? I mean, can you guys go back and, and reexamine the media exemption in terms of these new rules?

CS: Well, I think we, we have to decide how to apply it...

NRAN: ...right...

CS: ...and we [get it...inaudible] comes up in cases [garbled].

NRAN: Mmm hmm...OK.

CS: For example, some people do not think the media exemption should apply to, for example, the kind of magazines you get from triple-A (AAA) or your investment company, or from, uh, Sam’s Club, or that sort of thing. Others of us look at those and say, “Hey, these are magazines. They have articles in them, they’re paid, they come out on a regular basis...they get the press exemption.”

I think it’s very dicey any time you get the government into this issue of deciding who is ‘legitimate’ press and who is not, and, and using that as a basis for telling people that [inaudible] speak on....[inaudible].

NRAN: Well, it sounds like the Judge and this bill have kind of forced you guys into that position, dicey though it might be.

CS: Yes, that’s where we are, yeah.

NRAN: Alright. Commissioner Bradley Smith with the Federal Election Commission. Thank you so much for your time this afternoon, sir, we greatly appreciate it, and look forward to having you back again on soon.

CS: My pleasure...

Again, thank you to Alex Kowalski for putting together this rush transcript. Please note it is an unedited or proofed version.