Author Topic: Reid wants to register bloggers  (Read 8258 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Reid wants to register bloggers
« on: January 18, 2007, 07:35:09 PM »


S.1 has been introduced in the Senate as "lobbying reform" -- which in this case means "First Amendment infringements." An amendment has been attached, which requires registration of bloggers with more than 500 readers, and who comment on policy issues. Violation would be a criminal offense.

I looked it up on the Library of Congress webpage (which is essentially unlinkable) and have attached section 220 in extended remarks, below. As the bill is reported, it appears to cover any "paid" grassroots lobbying, that reaches more than 500 people. But a blogger who receives contributions might be classed as a "paid" grassroots type. It looks like Congress wants to keep an eye on annoying people like Porkbusters. It may be significant that S.1 was introduced by Harry Reid, one of the Kings of Pork.

SEC. 220. DISCLOSURE OF PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING.

(a) Definitions- Section 3 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1602) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (7), by adding at the end of the following: `Lobbying activities include paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, but do not include grassroots lobbying.'; and
(2) by adding at the end of the following:
`(17) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING- The term `grassroots lobbying' means the voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same.
`(18) PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING-
`(A) IN GENERAL- The term `paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying' means any paid attempt in support of lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to influence the general public or segments thereof to contact one or more covered legislative or executive branch officials (or Congress as a whole) to urge such officials (or Congress) to take specific action with respect to a matter described in section 3(8)(A), except that such term does not include any communications by an entity directed to its members, employees, officers, or shareholders.
`(B) PAID ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE GENERAL PUBLIC OR SEGMENTS THEREOF- The term `paid attempt to influence the general public or segments thereof' does not include an attempt to influence directed at less than 500 members of the general public.
`(C) REGISTRANT- For purposes of this paragraph, a person or entity is a member of a registrant if the person or entity--
`(i) pays dues or makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount to the entity;
`(ii) makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount of time to the entity;
`(iii) is entitled to participate in the governance of the entity;
`(iv) is 1 of a limited number of honorary or life members of the entity; or
`(v) is an employee, officer, director or member of the entity.
`(19) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING FIRM- The term `grassroots lobbying firm' means a person or entity that--
`(A) is retained by 1 or more clients to engage in paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying on behalf of such clients; and
`(B) receives income of, or spends or agrees to spend, an aggregate of $25,000 or more for such efforts in any quarterly period.'.
(b) Registration- Section 4(a) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1603(a)) is amended--
(1) in the flush matter at the end of paragraph (3)(A), by adding at the end the following: `For purposes of clauses (i) and (ii), the term `lobbying activities' shall not include paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.'; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
`(4) FILING BY GRASSROOTS LOBBYING FIRMS- Not later than 45 days after a grassroots lobbying firm first is retained by a client to engage in paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, such grassroots lobbying firm shall register with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives.'.
(c) Separate Itemization of Paid Efforts To Stimulate Grassroots Lobbying- Section 5(b) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by--
(A) inserting after `total amount of all income' the following: `(including a separate good faith estimate of the total amount of income relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying and, within that amount, a good faith estimate of the total amount specifically relating to paid advertising)'; and
(B) inserting `or a grassroots lobbying firm' after `lobbying firm';
(2) in paragraph (4), by inserting after `total expenses' the following: `(including a good faith estimate of the total amount of expenses relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying and, within that total amount, a good faith estimate of the total amount specifically relating to paid advertising)'; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
`Subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) shall not apply with respect to reports relating to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying activities.'.
(d) Good Faith Estimates and De Minimis Rules for Paid Efforts To Stimulate Grassroots Lobbying-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 5(c) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604(c)) is amended to read as follows:
`(c) Estimates of Income or Expenses- For purposes of this section, the following shall apply:
`(1) Estimates of income or expenses shall be made as follows:
`(A) Estimates of amounts in excess of $10,0000 shall be rounded to the nearest $20,000.
`(B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed $10,000, the registrant shall include a statement that income or expenses totaled less than $10,000 for the reporting period.
`(2) Estimates of income or expenses relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying shall be made as follows:
`(A) Estimates of amounts in excess of $25,000 shall be rounded to the nearest $20,000.
`(B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed $25,000, the registrant shall include a statement that income or expenses totaled less than $25,000 for the reporting period.'.
(2) TAX REPORTING- Section 15 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1610) is amended--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) in paragraph (1), by striking `and' after the semicolon;
(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting `; and'; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
`(3) in lieu of using the definition of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying in section 3(18), consider as paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying only those activities that are grassroots expenditures as defined in section 4911(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.'; and
(B) in subsection (b)--
(i) in paragraph (1), by striking `and' after the semicolon;
(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting `; and'; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
`(3) in lieu of using the definition of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying in section 3(18), consider as paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying only those activities that are grassroots expenditures as defined in section 4911(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.'.

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2007/01/register_blogge_1.php

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2007, 07:42:39 PM »
Didn't I also get wind the notion of bringing back the "Fairness Doctrine"?   >:(    Notice also how so often they'll title their legislation pretty much the opposite of what it actually is?  Dems & Republicans both
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8010
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2007, 07:57:25 PM »
do we qualify?

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2007, 08:02:10 PM »
Quote
do we qualify?

No

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #4 on: January 19, 2007, 12:22:03 AM »
I'd like to see the Fairness Doctrine brought back.
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2007, 12:29:01 AM »
I'd like to see the Fairness Doctrine brought back.

I'm sure you would.  What better way to stifle the 1 area Conservatives have managed hold over the liberal monopoly of the mainscream media.  1st amendment?  What 1st amendment.  Heck, just words on a paper that mean squat, right Lanya?

 :'(
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2007, 01:34:08 AM »
Please do not play the victim. It's ridiculous.

Fairness Doctrine was fine during Ike, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon...it'll be fine now.
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2007, 01:48:43 AM »
Please do not play the victim. It's ridiculous.

As I said, 1st amendment's no biggie.  Makes one wonder why the left is so up in arms with the supposed attacks on the other amendments by Bush, since Lanya here has no problems with the "Fairness" Doctrine's attack on the 1st.

So, let's make sure it's also applied to the mainstream news, News organizations, Schools (especially the Colleges & Universities), oh and let's not forget Hollywood & their Political "Documentaries".  Must get equal representation and diverse viewpoints

Doable now? 

Or are we just talking talk radio (read: where people CHOSE to listen to conservative radio shows/hosts over that of liberal radio shows/hosts.  Can't be having that now, can we.  Just not possible to turn to a different station, is it?)


"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #8 on: January 19, 2007, 01:52:31 PM »
As far as I remember, it always applied to news stations, whether radio or tv.   I don't know what else it applied to.
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

Brassmask

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2600
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2007, 02:05:04 PM »
So, then sirs would HATE to see Rush have to provide time for fair and balanced views of the issues?

The irony is delicious...

The fairness doctrine pretty much helped keep lies out of the news.

Brassmask

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2600
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2007, 02:06:25 PM »
Also, BT, I think this would apply more to liars like the Swiftboaters.

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #11 on: January 19, 2007, 02:13:47 PM »
As far as I remember, it always applied to news stations, whether radio or TV.   I don't know what else it applied to.

The Fairness Doctrine was instituted in 1949. The main argument for the doctrine at the time was the "scarcity" of media outlets. This scarcity is no longer true.

The fairness doctrine pretty much helped keep lies out of the news.

It was never intended to censor lies. Basically, it said that if a station said anything about person X (if he were a politician), the station would be required to give that person equal air time. With the number of candidates in current election cycles, it would pretty much stultify the news programs.

And can you imagine all the air time that would have been given to Delay?

Actually, many reporters from both sides of the political spectrum are against the Fairness Doctrine.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #12 on: January 19, 2007, 02:16:30 PM »
Quote
Also, BT, I think this would apply more to liars like the Swiftboaters.

Would it also apply to the Kossacks?

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #13 on: January 19, 2007, 02:24:00 PM »
So, then sirs would HATE to see Rush have to provide time for fair and balanced views of the issues?

Actually, what I hate is the government telling me what I can and can't listen to.  What I hate is telling anyone (like rush) who has a certain POV that they can't be hired to express their opinion unless they have someone who's anti-Rush on the same station providing an equal amount of time to express their POV.  Currently no one's preventing such, simply that from a ratings stand point, no one WANTS to listen to it.  Thus you have the left coming to the rescue.  and last time I checked, Rush and others provide time for opposing viewpoints on their shows.  In fact they look forward to presenting them, for what they are


The irony is delicious...

Actually, the hypocrisy of the left is indeed the most savoring quality of this thread so far.  Utter contempt for the 1st amendment when it's an opposing POV


The fairness doctrine pretty much helped keep lies out of the news.

We're not talking "news" Brass.  We're talking "talk" (i.e OPINION) Radio.  And we're talking free market and the freedom of the consumer to change to a different station if they don't like listening to what their hearing.  Can we put you down for advocating a "Fainess Doctrine" within our higher education centers, High schools, Colleges, Universities, where students don't have the option of "switching channels"?  Or are you only targeting the 1 area that Conservatives actually have a strong voice, thus reinforcing the hypocrisy

« Last Edit: January 19, 2007, 04:33:02 PM by sirs »
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Brassmask

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2600
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Reid wants to register bloggers
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2007, 02:34:20 PM »
As far as I remember, it always applied to news stations, whether radio or TV.   I don't know what else it applied to.

The Fairness Doctrine was instituted in 1949. The main argument for the doctrine at the time was the "scarcity" of media outlets. This scarcity is no longer true.

The fairness doctrine pretty much helped keep lies out of the news.

It was never intended to censor lies. Basically, it said that if a station said anything about person X (if he were a politician), the station would be required to give that person equal air time. With the number of candidates in current election cycles, it would pretty much stultify the news programs.

And can you imagine all the air time that would have been given to Delay?

Actually, many reporters from both sides of the political spectrum are against the Fairness Doctrine.

The FD would not have given Delay any time.  It wouldn't apply to a story about a guy getting indicted for a crime.  The indicted criminal didn't get time to come on and defend himself.

It would and did apply, I imagine to something like the NBC hatchet job(IMO) done on Jim Garrison in the '60's and then he sued to get equal time.

As did McCarthy when E R Morrow whacked McCarthy's nose with a rolled-up newspaper.

I'm sure many are against the FD since it would restrict what they had to fill their hours and hours of ad nauseam conjecture and outright lies.