www.dailykos.com/story/2005/4/13/172939/078
mkrempasky Wed Apr 13th, 2005 at 14:42:59 PDT (From the diaries -- Krempasky has led the charge against efforts to regu late the Internet on his side of the aisle, and getting a Republican spo nsor for the House version was key to ensure passage in that chamber. Ou r chances of success are looking pretty good so far as real opposition h asn't arisen, though I don't doubt that McCain and Feingold are too happ y with this. This is an issue because they sued the FEC's over, among ot her things, its Internet exemption -- kos).
Today in the House of Represenatives, Congressman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) introduced a companion piece of legislation to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid's bill ( S678) to exclude the Internet fr om the definition of "public communication" in the Bipartisan Campaign F inance Reform Act of 2002. This is a bill that deserves bipartisan support, and it's exciting to see it off to a good start. In short - if this bill passes both houses and becomes law in the next 50 or-so days, the FEC rulemaking process will be rendered moot. Remember, the FEC is only creating regulations for Internet activity because Cong ress didn't specifically mention the Internet at all, and a federal judg e ruled that even in the absence of specific direction of Congress, the FEC had to do so anyway. This bill provides that direction, and creates that exclusion. It might n ot solve all the problems of regulation, but it's miles and away the bes t solution right now. I've already heard from some liberal colleagues in the blogosphere, and we're going to push this bill - and hard. The blogosophere has proven extraordinary aptitude when it comes to attac king or stopping something, let's prove that we can be just as much a po werful influence when it comes to creating and moving something forward.
Parent lets push something bigger than the NET ( 400 / 2) like peace on earth END WORLD HUNGER, THE GREATEST TERROR. most poor nations pay more interest on debts, than they recieve in humanitarian aid.
Parent you could learn something ( 400 / 2) Mike, I used to be a Republican. The final straw for me was when you banned me from Redstate because my vi ews were too moderate. I used to think that there was hope for reform in the Republican party. B ut as far as I can tell, you are merely supported by the vast numbers of bigots, racists, and fundamentalist pro-choicers, with exclusionists cl aiming a big tent at the top.
none / 0) Suggesting that someplace is "not the place" to have a particular argumen t is an authoritarian idea that, frankly, Republicans use all the time t o avoid topics that may damage them. The moment someone says that, I want to know what's being hidden. If the discussion happens and you don't want to participate, that's your call. But if other people are interested, this is the place to have the discus sion.
none / 0) Krempasky has done a good turn for all of us on this one. I said, "Step pause turn pause pivot step step", not, "Step pause turn pa use pivot step pause"!
Stephanie Herseth need a telephone call to remind them that some of the money that helped contribute to their special election win came from the sort of internet fundraising that the FEC is being ordered to r egulate.
none / 0) needs to be reminded that while his last name got him elected, he still n eeds to actually do something while he's in Congress. Unless he's planning to run against Fletcher again in 2007, he needs to s tart showing signs of life in Congress.
none / 0) Are there any down sides to this bill - unintended consequences that coul d prove challenging down the road? For instance, there are some countries where the internet is not consider ed "public" and therefore the ISP can block at will any site they wish w ith no repercussions. In those countries the phone companies have contr acts with the government that give them exclusive rights to the market. Does the definition of "public" change the internet on a greater level? I have to be a bit cautious when a repub jumps on board even if Reid auth ored the Senate version.
Wed Apr 13th, 2005 at 14:43:30 PDT to be clear ( 400 / 2) The FEC can only regulation what goes on in the US with US campaigns, and really only regulates money, not speech. There aren't unintended consequences, but there are ghastly intended ones .
none / 0) But let's be upfront: you support this proposal because you do not believ e that the flow of money in politics should be regulated at all, as an a bridgement of free speech. Others may support this proposal because they believe there's something u nique about the nature of political activity on the internet which makes otherwise sensible regulation unwise here, but that's not you. One example: If you believe that paid advertising on the internet need no t be disclosed on the website (see, eg, the Thune bloggers), then go a head and support this bill.
I don't like the idea of forcing bloggers to have a higher burden. And for what it's worth, even without this bill, the rulemaking at the FEC w on't touch this - because the only way they can is to make bloggers agen ts, which of course would be even more disastrous.
In short, having no regulation at all m ay open the door too widely to undisclosed coordinated communications an d other problems which run afoul of the intent of Campaign Finance Refor m (which, I know, you generally oppose, period).
the FEC Project proceeds, and I welcome any commentary you have o n the proposed regulations. Remember: the alternative to "no regulation" is smart regulation, which w ould allow unpaid volunteer advocacy to remain free of oversight but ens ure that the flow of money is disclosed to all.
declaration of the independence of cyberspace Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. We have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one, so I addres s you with no greater authority than that with which liberty itself alwa ys speaks. I declare the global social space we are building to be natur ally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear. Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Do not think that you can build it, as though it were a p ublic construction project. It is an act of nature and it gr ows itself through our collective actions. You have not engaged in our great and gathering conversation, nor did you create the wealth of our marketplaces. You do not know our culture, our ethics, or the unwritten codes that already provide our society more or der than could be obtained by any of your impositions. You claim there are problems among us that you need to solve. You use thi s claim as an excuse to invade our precincts. Where there are real conflicts, where there are wrongs, we wil l identify them and address them by our means. This governance will arise according to the conditions o f our world, not yours. Cyberspace consists of transactions, relationships, and thought itself, a rrayed like a standing wave in the web of our communications. Ours is a world that is both everywhere and nowhere, but it is not where bodies li ve. We are creating a world that all may enter without privilege or prejudice accorded by race, economic power, military force, or station of birth. We are creating a world where anyone, anywhere may express his or her bel iefs, no matter how singular, without fear of being coerced into silence or conformity. Your legal concepts of property, expression, identity, movement, and cont ext do not apply to us. They are all based on matter, and there is no ma tter here. Our identities have no bodies, so, unlike you, we cannot obtain order by physical coercion. We believe that from ethics, enlightened self-interes t, and the commonweal, our governance will emerge . Our identities may b e distributed across many of your jurisdictions. The only law that all o ur constituent cultures would generally recognize is the Golden Rule. We hope we will be a...
|
http://csua.com/feed/