Thanks to the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, and a lawsuit
brought by Reps. Shays and Meehan, and the unwillingness of the FEC's
Democratic commissioners to fight it, we now have Internet election
regulations. Yay.
They're here:
http://www.fec.gov/agenda/2006/mtgdoc06-20.pdf
http://www.fec.gov/agenda/2006/mtgdoc06-20a.pdf
Background is here:
http://news.com.com/2010-1071_3-5637778.html
Former FEC Chairman Brad Smith sounds a cautionary note here:
http://brad-smith.redstate.com/story/2006/3/25/113459/934
The biggest problem with the rules is simply the principle established -
the internet is now to be subject to regulation. The FEC can change the
rules - extend them - when it wants. My friend and current Commission
Chairman Michael Toner put it best most succinctly in a private
conversation we had while I was still on the Commission a while back:
"Isn't there any area of political discussion that we can just leave
unregulated?" The answer, for far too many, in the so-called "reform"
community, in Congress, in the MSM and elsewhere, appears to be "no,
there is no area of political discussion that should be free from
government regulation." So most web activity - except for paid ads -
will remain exempt, but as a matter of administrative grace rather than
right. Rick Hasen, who runs the widely cited Election Law site, is
already disappointed that the rule doesn't require more mandatory
disclosure. We can expect "reform" groups such as Democracy 21 and the
Campaign Legal Center to regularly lobby for extensions of the FEC
approach to regulate more activity.
-Declan
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)