Democrats' bill could regulate, criminalize political bloggers

Tuesday, January 23, 2007 by: Jessica Fraser
Tags: bloggers, politics, freedom of speech

https://www.naturalnews.com/021484_bloggers_politics.html

Tweet

---

The controversial piece of the bill -- found in Section 220 -- indicates that political bloggers who either earn or spend $25,000 every three months, and who encourage their blog readers to contact their congressional representatives over certain political issues, would be required to register with the government as lobbyists, or face a prison term of up to 10 years.

"You have a First Amendment right to contact your congressperson and you have a First Amendment right to tell others to do so," said Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "Now they're saying you have to report to the federal government if you're going to engage in this First Amendment-protected activity."

The legislation -- which opponents have criticized as poorly worded -- says that a "grassroots lobbying firm" must register with the government in order to avoid fees and criminal prosecution. However, "grassroots lobbying" is defined as any person who is paid for their efforts that encourage the "general public to communicate their own views on an issue to federal officials." If that person also makes or spends $25,000 per quarter, registration with the government would be mandatory.

According to Mark Fitzgibbons of American Target Advertising, Section 220 "has no regard for the media being used," since it includes the internet, where bloggers would surely be affected. For example, a political blogger who raises the funds for a quarterly newspaper ad that costs $25,000 would have to register, Fitzgibbons said.

Objections to Section 220 have increased since it came to the public's attention last week, and a number of conservative groups have urged their legislators to vote against it. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he would vote in favor of a measure to remove Section 220 from the original bill.

Supporters of the bill claim Section 220's language is simply misunderstood, and it should be re-written to emphasize to opponents that its damage to bloggers' First Amendment rights would be minimal.

However, according to Fitzgibbons, regulating the political activities of bloggers who are not connected to Washington lobbying only "shifts the blame away from the real culprits within Congress and Washington."

###