Fahrenheit 9/11 is, judging from what its creator himself incessantly says, a collage of lying agitprop. Nonetheless, one need not be a First Amendment absolutist to believe that Michael Moore should be free to show it in theaters to any sucker who will come, even if - indeed, especially if - his purpose is to influence the outcome of an election. The Wall Street Journal's subscription-only Political Diary (invaluable, but you can get it for $3.95 a month) reports, however, that the film may be caught in the trammels of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. Hoping that I'm not violating the DMCA, here is what John Fund says about this bizarre development:
Six members of the Federal Election Commission will meet in Washington today to decide whether it's legal for Michael Moore to advertise his Bush-bashing "Fahrenheit 9/11" film on TV or radio without breaking federal law.According to an opinion by the FEC's legal counsel, the movie's producer, Lions Gate Films, should be prohibited from running ads for "Fahrenheit" after July 30 because the McCain-Feingold campaign law prohibits any corporation (with a narrow exception for the news media) from running ads that even identify a candidate for president or Congress within 30 days of a primary election and within 60 days of a general election. Because Mr. Moore has publicly said the film is designed to defeat George W. Bush, there's no way it could be construed as other than a political effort.
Congressional members who voted for McCain-Feingold's restrictions on the First Amendment were no doubt assured that broad exemptions would exist for political speech. They were wrong. The FEC counsel's opinion is quite pointed in noting that the 2003 Supreme Court opinion upholding McCain-Feingold made clear that "the media exemption was 'narrow' and drew a distinction between 'corporations that are part of the media industry' as opposed to 'other corporations that are not involved in the regular business of imparting news to the public.'" Print and broadcast companies with news divisions meet the exemption standard; documentary film companies do not.
No one knows how the FEC will deal with this hot potato at its meeting today but the fact that the proposed muzzling of Michael Moore is on the agenda at all should be cause for concern. David Broder, the Washington Post columnist who championed the McCain-Feingold campaign reform law for years, has finally admitted it is unworkable. What the legal opinion of the FEC's general counsel proves is that it's also potentially dangerous to our freedoms.
McCain-Feingold was a favorite liberal cause. There would be nice irony if Michael Moore were its first victim. Better yet would be if this threat led to the law's quick repeal.
Comments