Comments on: Election law and blogs

By: Luis Villa

Luis Villa — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Interestingly, Zephyr Teachout suggests that the FEC could basically be reduced to a clearinghouse like fundrace.org in the future. This would probably reduce some of the conflicts you're discussing here. Anyway, recommend reading her post.

By: Miller

Miller — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Wouldn’t the logic extend to talk radio as well?

By: Sebastian Holsclaw

Sebastian Holsclaw — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

My view on what ought to happen is nothing. But I think election communications ought not be regulated at all. Free speech is all about protecting political speech. It is kind of funny that we accept near obcenity which is protected so that we don’t get anywhere near political speech but we have arguments about political speech which is the whole core of free speech.

By: washerdreyer

washerdreyer — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I’m pretty sure the first sentence suggests that you’re doing research now in order to then travel back in time and teach the course. In which case you probably have a more interesting topic you could be teaching about than the intersection of election law and blogging.

By: tib

tib — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

You are buying into the fear-mongering of the opponents of campaign finance reform, like Sebastian Holsclaw.

I would suggest a quick read of the FEC BCRA FAQ and their paid communications brochure. The FEC regulates how political organizations raise and spend money, and how they may advertise. It does not regulate media generally, not even political media like FOX news or The American Prospect. Crooked Timber and Instapundit aren’t suddenly going to be regulated by the FEC.

What the Brookings chapter is obliquely referring to is the likely regulation of paid mass online communication, i.e. bulk email and banner ads. FEC rules could govern what kind of money may be used to pay for those efforts and whether an organization may mention a candidate, they would probably be similar to the rules governing political direct mail.

As for Teachout, I can’t really make out what she is trying to say. Where do you think fundrace gets it’s data from? The FEC is already focused on transparency. Anyone with half a clue who worked on a campaign knows that the FEC does not outlaw participation, it prevents soft money (money from corporations, unions and amounts over $25,000) from being used to influence parties and candidates.

By: dave heasman

dave heasman — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

a quick aside, Sebastian suggests “It is kind of funny that we accept near obcenity which is protected so that we don’t get anywhere near political speech …”

Some of us recall the 60s where a lot of what was obviously political “speech” was attacked for obscenity. It’s what they go for every time.

By: Edrik

Edrik — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Considering the nature of the internet and nature of blogging, I imagine any attempts at regulation would be far from successful.

By: ADE Bloggers

ADE Bloggers — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Election law and blogs

“crooked timber”: While doing some research a couple of weeks ago for a course I

By: Right Wing News

Right Wing News — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Thank You Senators McCain and Feingold … You [Plural Expletive Deleted] By Stephen Bainbridge

A while back, Henry Farrell offered this prediction: As political blogs become a more established part of the political landscape,…

By: UNCoRRELATED

UNCoRRELATED — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Regulating Internet Campaign Activity: A contrarian view

The Declan McCullagh CNET article/interview with Bradley Smith, one of the six commissioners on the Federal Elections Commission, has predictably generated a blogstorm over the prospect that the government might actually regulate the internet. Of cours…

By: UNCoRRELATED

UNCoRRELATED — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Regulating Internet Campaign Activity: A contrarian view