Perhaps it was alarmist to worry that section 220 of the Senate’s new “ethics bill” might require bloggers – at least, ones with large audiences and tip jars – to register with the FEC. OTOH, the provision was bad enough in general. To force anyone who engages in a “paid attempt in support of lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to influence the general public or segments thereof to contact one or more covered legislative or executive branch officials (or Congress as a whole) to urge such officials (or Congress) to take specific action” to go through a fairly onerous registration and disclosure process isn’t what the Founders meant by robust debate of issues of public interest.
For the moment, the provision is gone, stricken from the bill by a vote of 55–43. What’s interesting is that the Democrats, whom one so often hears bewailing the incipient fascism of the Bush Administration, voted 43–7 for this abridgement of free expression. Every Republican voted the other way (counting one paired with the incapacitated Senator Johnson). I observe that those conservatives who imagine that James Webb will prove to be an ally received further disconfirmation of that hope.
I’m not a First Amendment absolutist, but the untrammeled right to present political arguments to the public is surely of the essence of liberty. Unhappily, a lot of liberals see matters differently. Their free speech hierarchy runs, in practice, like this:
[Most protected] Any and all speech incidental to recommending, procuring or carrying out abortions.
[Dear to the hearts of the Founding Parents] Flag burning; anti-American advocacy.
[Else the terrorists will have won] Disclosure of state secrets; Islamofascist rants.
[Run-of-the-mill] Pornography, indecency, blasphemy (except blasphemy against The Religion of Peace, for which see category 8), anything having to do with sex.
[Tolerable within bounds] Advertising and other commercial speech.
[Under suspicion and in need of strict government oversight] Advocacy of political positions (unless elevated to category 2).
[An avenue for corruption] Support of and opposition to candidates for office.
[Ya gotta be kidding!] Expression of Christian or Jewish sentiments in public places; remarks offensive to the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
The vote on section 220 is a useful reminder of who the real fascists are.
Addendum: (a) Who said this? (b) Was the asterisked-out word “left” or “right”?
We had a massive strategy to use the fairness doctrine to challenge and harass the *****-wing broadcasters, and hope the challenge would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited and decide it was too expensive to continue.
Answers: (a) Bill Ruder, Assistant Secretary of Commerce under President John F. Kennedy. (b) “Right”.
The incoming chairman of the House subcommittee that oversees broadcasting advocates making the “fairness doctrine” law again. He is not a Republican.
Comments