Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FEC May Regulate Web Political Activity
Yahoo News ^ | 10/13/04 | SHARON THEIMER, AP

Posted on 10/13/2004 1:45:08 AM PDT by kattracks

WASHINGTON - With political fund raising, campaign advertising and organizing taking place in full swing over the Internet, it may just be a matter of time before the Federal Election Commission (news - web sites) joins the action. Well, that time may be now.

A recent federal court ruling says the FEC must extend some of the nation's new campaign finance and spending limits to political activity on the Internet.

Long reluctant to step into online political activity, the agency is considering whether to appeal.

But vice chairwoman Ellen Weintraub said the Internet may prove to be an unavoidable area for the six-member commission, regardless of what happens with the ruling.

"I don't think anybody here wants to impede the free flow of information over the Internet," Weintraub said. "The question then is, where do you draw the line?"

This election season has been a groundbreaking one online, as interest groups, campaigns and political parties use Web sites and e-mail to advertise, organize volunteers, reach out to donors and collect information about voters.

Former Democratic presidential hopeful Howard Dean (news - web sites) made the most pronounced splash online when he stunned his rivals by raking in tens of millions of dollars through Web-a-thons, a far cheaper fund-raising method than traditional dinners and cocktail parties. And Internet message boards, known as blogs, have become as common a place for people to air their political views as talk shows and newspaper editorial pages.

The Internet also is where political players do what they can no longer do on television or radio.

The National Rifle Association, for example, has started an online newscast and talk show to air its views on presidential and congressional candidates. The Internet is exempt from a ban on the use of corporate money for radio and TV ads targeting federal candidates close to elections, part of the new campaign finance law that took effect this election cycle.

The November Fund, an anti-trial lawyer group partly funded by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (news - web sites), is posting Internet ads criticizing Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards (news - web sites), a North Carolina senator and former personal-injury lawyer.

The FEC exempted such ads from the law's ban on coordination between candidates and groups that raise or spend corporate money. Last month, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly struck down the coordination exemption, ruling that it "severely undermines" the law.

Fred Wertheimer, president of the campaign watchdog group Democracy 21 and member of the legal team that successfully sued to overturn that and several other FEC rules interpreting the law, said campaign finance laws should apply to the Internet because substantial amounts of money are being spent on online at election time.

The laws may not always apply to the Internet as they would to other venues, Wertheimer said, "but by the same token the Internet cannot become a major avenue for evading and circumventing campaign finance laws on the grounds that people just want the Internet free from regulation of any kind."

Max Fose, a Republican Internet consultant who helped Arizona Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), a sponsor of the new campaign finance law, raise millions of dollars online for his 2000 presidential bid, is wary of the judge's ruling.

"Whenever there's something new and emerging and it's still developing, to place restrictions on it I think is going to hurt how political candidates and elected officials look to use the Internet, to not only be elected but look to get voters involved," Fose said.



TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 1984; democracy21; fec; firstamendment; freedomofassociation; freedomofpress; freedomofspeech; napalminthemorning; soros
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-129 next last

1 posted on 10/13/2004 1:45:09 AM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kattracks

bttt


2 posted on 10/13/2004 1:46:49 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks

The first step in shutting down free information access by internet. Guess it will be back to mass mailings.


3 posted on 10/13/2004 1:47:50 AM PDT by ClancyJ (Vote for President Bush - For our grandchildren. Democrats are not to be trusted with our country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks

How do they stop foreign advertisers who wish to influence our election?


4 posted on 10/13/2004 1:54:07 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks; Congressman Billybob

Well now, this is gonna make for an interesting fight. This CFR B/S is getting so convoluted I don't see how they can do anything more than throwing it out. Bring back the first amendment!!


5 posted on 10/13/2004 1:56:04 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
"I don't think anybody here wants to impede the free flow of information over the Internet," Weintraub said. "The question then is, where do you draw the line?"

You don't. Stay out of it government. We the people have the right to speak.
6 posted on 10/13/2004 1:58:36 AM PDT by Blogger (Pray for President Bush and our nation!!!!! The Lord is our Hope and Strength!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
How do they stop foreign advertisers who wish to influence our election?

Like Terayza Heinz?
7 posted on 10/13/2004 1:59:00 AM PDT by Sociopathocracy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
How do they stop foreign advertisers who wish to influence our election?

Such as this: Norwegians Place Anti-Bush Ad in Washington Post"|

8 posted on 10/13/2004 1:59:02 AM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sociopathocracy

She's not even coherent. I can't believe that the libs actually like her.


9 posted on 10/13/2004 1:59:42 AM PDT by Blogger (Pray for President Bush and our nation!!!!! The Lord is our Hope and Strength!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kattracks; Howlin; Timesink; Mr. Silverback; Utah Girl; hosepipe; backhoe; FITZ; Happy2BMe; ...

Free $peech for $ome ?


10 posted on 10/13/2004 2:00:05 AM PDT by ATOMIC_PUNK (Want to know why I don't vote Democrat?" http://www.museumofleftwinglunacy.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Was posting the Sun article, unexerpted, on Kerry against F.R. rules? I flagged the Admin Moderator just in case it was, but nothing ever happened with my post. Don't want to get F.R. in trouble due to posting subscriber only material.


11 posted on 10/13/2004 2:02:09 AM PDT by Blogger (Pray for President Bush and our nation!!!!! The Lord is our Hope and Strength!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Information is power and our mega-government wants us to have only enough power to write out that check to IRS. The USSC eagerly put its stamp of approval on CFR. In fact, the majority of those justices think we should all be subject to european law, so it's not surprising that they would despise the 1st Amendment -- along with all the other Amendments (except for the commerce clause and, of course, the famous "right to privacy" clause).

If they can find a way to kill the internet, they will. Count on it.

12 posted on 10/13/2004 2:18:46 AM PDT by Bonaparte (twisting slowly, slowly in the wind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Information is power and our mega-government wants us to have only enough power to write out that check to IRS. The USSC eagerly put its stamp of approval on CFR. In fact, the majority of those justices think we should all be subject to european law, so it's not surprising that they would despise the 1st Amendment -- along with all the other Amendments (except for the commerce clause and, of course, the famous "right to privacy" clause).

If they can find a way to kill the internet, they will. Count on it.

13 posted on 10/13/2004 2:18:58 AM PDT by Bonaparte (twisting slowly, slowly in the wind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
This will be like a piece of bread taking on a killer-ant colony.
14 posted on 10/13/2004 2:23:51 AM PDT by Caipirabob (Democrats.. Socialists..Commies..Traitors...Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks

Where's the barf alert? ;-)


15 posted on 10/13/2004 2:25:44 AM PDT by Weirdad (A Free Republic, not a "democracy" (mob rule))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks

FEC better tread lightly or they may overstep their authority.


16 posted on 10/13/2004 2:36:39 AM PDT by demlosers (The FreeRepublic Pajama Press!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Payback for embarrassing Rather. And for the Swift Boat Vets daring to express their opinions.
17 posted on 10/13/2004 2:41:34 AM PDT by gitmo (Thanks, Mel. I needed that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks

And just how exactly are they going to stop me from publishing on the internet?


18 posted on 10/13/2004 2:42:48 AM PDT by BJungNan (Stop Spam - Do NOT buy from junk email.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
First we'll outlaw moneyed special interests from purchasing air time and unduly influencing elections; it's only fair because the little guy doesn't have equal access.

Then we'll outlaw the little guy from publically talking about politics before an election because it's unfair for him to be able to do it while the moneyed special interests can't.

YEAH, THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE!

Just what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

Shut everybody up, first for 60 days before an election, then 90, then 180, then a year, then forever.

19 posted on 10/13/2004 3:01:50 AM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blogger

I'm glad she changed parties because she's their problem now.


20 posted on 10/13/2004 3:02:08 AM PDT by MadAnthony1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-129 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson