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/)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Wed Mar 29 2006 - 01:02:35 PST