WHY MAKING A MOUNTAIN OUT OF A MOLEHILL IS SOMETIMES A GOOD THING
The blogswarm surrounding the C-Net interview yesterday with FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith may prove to be much ado about nothing. This statement from The Campaign Legal Center courtesy of What Attitude Problem:
Washington, D.C. — In a recent interview with CNET, Federal Election Commissioner Brad Smith claimed that as a result of new campaign laws and and a recent court decision, online news organizations and bloggers may soon wake up to find their activities regulated by government bureaucrats. That would indeed be troubling, if it were true. Fortunately, Mr. Smith - an avowed opponent of most campaign finance regulation - is simply wrong.
Mr. Smith’s comments are obviously designed to instigate a furor in the blogosphere to pressure Congress to reverse the court decision requiring that paid political ads on the Internet should be treated like any other paid advertisements. Mr. Smith has a right to try to win converts to his anti-regulatory philosophy, but he has an obligation to present the issues fairly and forthrightly, and his comments to CNET fail both tests.
I am not a legal expert. I have, however, been a keen observer of American politics and government for nearly 30 years. I can tell you for a fact that whatever the government can do, is capable of doing, it will try to do. It doesn’t matter if it’s “constitutional” or not. Anyone who’s ever seen a copy of the Federal Register knows that there are literally thousands of rules published every year that infringe on private property rights, individual liberty, and constitutional protections. Unless these rules are challenged during the comment period or in court, they eventually wind up having the force of law.
And you wonder why there are so many lobbyists?
The fact that the current controversy over Mr. Smith’s remarks may be a tempest in a teapot is beside the point. Unless people are willing to stand up and protest even the remote possibility that such rules and regulations governing political speech could be promulgated, the chances are that the “remote possibility” will turn into “virtual certainty.”
This is the nature of government. It’s not bad. It’s not evil. It’s not corrupt. It simply exists to govern. It’s the closest thing to a man-made force of nature around.
And there’s nothing inherently bad about the bureaucracy. Government departments are run by people just like you and me. They have families. They have successes and failures. They have dreams and goals. And most of them are sincerely interested in doing what’s right according to their own lights. They are, however, not perfect.
They can be horribly wrong at times. And if we stand by and do nothing, we pay for their mistakes with a loss of freedom. That’s why it’s so important to protest the idea of regulating political blogs. I have no idea whether this “Campaign Legal Center” has its own political axe to grind or not. It sounds like they don’t like Mr. Smith or anyone else who objects to the regulation of political speech very much. That’s fine. But they’re whistling past the graveyard if they don’t believe that government is at least capable of taking this action.
If making a mountain out of a molehill is the price to pay for maintaining vigilance over a rapacious and overweening government, so be it.
UPDATE: FROM THE “NOT SO FAST” DEPARTMENT
Dan Glover of The National Journal has been kind enough to email his article from today which attempts to quiet the uproar over this issue.
It’s not exactly comforting.
Here’s Glover on Democratic Commission member Danny McDonald:
He acknowledged that whether the law should apply to bloggers in any way most likely will be discussed, especially in light of Smith’s comments. But he added, “It’s all going to be aired publicly, and we’ll have a great discussion about what we should and shouldn’t do.”
I’m so happy to hear that if the law will apply to bloggers “in any way” McDonald reassuringly tells us that “it’s all going to be aired publicly and we’ll have a great discussion about what we should and shouldn’t do.”
Am I an idiot or does that sound like regulation to you? To even suggest that there are things “we should do” only proves there are some Commissioners who would seek to regulate blogs.
Another Commission member Ellen Weintraub is a little more comforting. “The notion that the FEC is going to go out there and shut down blogs is preposterous,” she said. Shut down, no. Regulate? She doesn’t say no, does she.
Other Democratic Commission members are pooh-poohing the idea of regulating bloggers. But McDonald’s comments are indicative that vigilance is necessary.
UPDATE II: BRADLEY SMITH RESPONDS
I received an email from Commssioner Smith defending his remarks against the Campaign Legal Center. You can see my post here.
Thanks for updating your post. As far as I can tell so far, you’re the only one to do so other than Rex Hammock and myself.Funny how everyone’s so quick on the draw when it looks like trouble’s right around the corner, but when it actually turns out to be nothing, so few seem to want to say anything.
Comment by greg — 3/4/2005 @ 2:21 pm
HOW GREAT IS THE FEC THREAT TO BLOGS?
K. Daniel Glover of National Journal’s Technology Daily has published a story on the FEC vs. blogs controversy. You can’t read the article without a subscription, so I’m not going to bother with a link, but the article quotes three…
Trackback by Michelle Malkin — 3/4/2005 @ 4:36 pm
HOW GREAT IS THE FEC THREAT TO BLOGS?
K. Daniel Glover of National Journal’s Technology Daily has published a story on the FEC vs. blogs controversy. You can’t read the article without a subscription, so I’m not going to bother with a link, but the article quotes three…
Trackback by Michelle Malkin — 3/4/2005 @ 4:41 pm
Blogs Will Not Go Quietly
Ed Morrissey, the Captain of Captain’s Quarters, has written his own letter to McCain and Feingold and copied every Senator as well. His letter is detailed, thorough and restrained. Which puts it in fairly stark contrast from the shoot-from-the-hip im…
Trackback by Hold The Mayo — 3/4/2005 @ 5:56 pm
For me if the molehill is a threat to my Constitutionally protected rights the bar for over-reacting is set very high. It is far better to fight such things while they are still only molehills. By the time they become mountains it may be too late.
Comment by Stephen Macklin — 3/4/2005 @ 6:00 pm
Liberal and Conservative Bloggers United
In Germany they came first for the Communists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn…
Trackback by La Shawn Barber's Corner — 3/4/2005 @ 6:30 pm
Blogging and free speech
This isn’t a question of free speech, so much as what something is if it walks, quacks, and smells like a duck.
Trackback by The Liferaft of Love — 3/4/2005 @ 7:22 pm
Walking it back
In response to the hysteria about Bradley Smith’s musings about the possible impact of campaign finance law on blogger speech rights, the FEC is doing damage control. The issue the FEC - and the courts - are grappling with is…
Trackback by UNCoRRELATED — 3/4/2005 @ 7:49 pm
The devil is in the details: the Internet was designed for collaboration thus it is inherently a prime target for McCain-Feingold
The Democracy Project has a very good smack down of the shill who came to McCain’s defense. There is just one point that I am surprised that the Democracy Project didn’t realize the significance of in the Campaign Legal Center’s…
Trackback by Blind Mind's Eye — 3/4/2005 @ 11:43 pm
the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing
There is definitely a blogswarm on the McCain Feingold loophole on bloggers that is rumored to be closing. The idea is that the internet will be subject to the same types of regulations that campaign contributions and their sources were subject to thi…
Trackback by Cao's Blog — 3/5/2005 @ 6:22 am
FEC, Blogging and Political Speech
There is a storm brewing.
If you haven’t read this CNET story, check it out:
Bradley Smith says that the freewheeling days of political blogging and online punditry are over.
In just a few months, he warns, bloggers and news organizations coul…
Trackback by Myopic Zeal — 3/5/2005 @ 7:10 am
[...] ADLEY SMITH RESPONDSASSAD HANGING ONTHE FUTURE OF POLITICAL CARTOONS UNDER McCAIN -FEINGOLD
Pingback by Right Wing Nut House » WHAT BLOGS HAVE WROUGHT: Politics served up with a smile... And a stilletto. — 3/6/2005 @ 1:48 pm
[...] ADLEY SMITH RESPONDSASSAD HANGING ONTHE FUTURE OF POLITICAL CARTOONS UNDER McCAIN -FEINGOLD
Pingback by Right Wing Nut House » WHAT BLOGS HAVE WROUGHT: Politics served up with a smile... And a stilletto. — 3/6/2005 @ 1:56 pm
Submitted for Your Approval
First off… any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here, and here. Die spambots, die! And now… here are all the links submitted by members of the Watcher’s Council for this week’s vote. Council li…
Trackback by Watcher of Weasels — 3/9/2005 @ 2:53 am
Carnival of the Vanities #129
Welcome, welcome, welcome, to the 129th edition of Bigwig’s Carnival of the Vanities, where bloggers from all around the blogosphere submit their own under-appreciated postings, rather than waiting for others to notice them. As your host, I hope you s…
Trackback by Solomonia — 3/9/2005 @ 2:04 pm
car
AUTONET009911
Trackback by car — 7/15/2006 @ 10:12 pm
[...] Rightwing Nuthouse, Mike Krempasky, and Winfield Myers have all responded. [...]
Pingback by Michelle Malkin » HOW BIG IS THE FEC THREAT TO BLOGS? — 9/25/2007 @ 8:46 pm