There is a plan by the FEC to regulate free online political sites to include free youtube postings and blogs like Drudge and Sean Hannity and much smaller sites.
Free speech on the Internet has not been regulated but Democrats want to change that. It’s an enormous overreach by government – the FEC does not legitimately have the power to regulate free speech on the Internet.
All blogs, videos, and Internet sites would be affected by a move at the FEC to add burdensome regulations.
The FEC under Democrat Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel is poised to come up with rules governing political speech on the Internet. She wants to treat political blogs like PACs.
The terms have expired for the three GOP members and they are waiting to be replaced. Once the FEC is led by Democrats, you can expect all these regulations to go through. The Democrat party does not support free speech when it can regulate, especially if it’s political speech.
They tried to reach an agreement on Internet campaign speech Friday but to no avail.
Americans and interest groups have been free in this country to enjoy robust political conversation on the Internet without burdensome government registrations and monitoring or keeping and reporting or records of expenses.
Ravel has decided that this has led to a loophole for major political players so she wants to shut us all down. The regulations she’s looking at will hurt the little guys like the Sentinel or even more significant bloggers like Drudge Report.
Ravel, a typical Democrat Socialist wants to shut down free speech under the guise of controlling major players.
She said the FEC should no longer “turn a blind eye to the Internet’s growing force in the political arena,” and she vowed to force a conversation next year on what changes to make.
The three Republican-backed commissioners, though, said in a joint statement that Ms. Ravel’s plans would stifle what’s become the “virtual free marketplace of political ideas and democratic debate.”
FEC Chairman Lee E. Goodman said what Ms. Ravel is proposing would require a massive bureaucracy digging into the corners of the web to police what’s posted about politics.
“I cannot imagine a regulatory regime that would put government censors on the Internet daily, culling YouTube video posts for violations of law — nothing short of a Chinese censorship board,” Mr. Goodman said.
These people want to shut down speech they disagree with and what they call “lies.” One case discussed in the past concerned 2 ads in 2012 that accused Obama of lying about a Romney event and of Sherrod Brown of lying about the “war on coal.”
They probably were lying.
That’s what she wants to shut down.
It reminds one of the Attorneys General who are planning to prosecute climate deniers for their free speech and the hate speech laws Loretta Lynch wants.
They simply want to kill the First Amendment. If Hillary wins the presidency, it should be easy. God help our First Amendment if Hillary gets in. She is behind Citizens United, a free speech case often mischaracterized by the left.
Political committees and individuals or groups who pay to have their ads run online are still subject to disclosure requirements and there is no need for another bureaucracy.
Ravel isn’t about to give up.
“Some of my colleagues seem to believe that the same political message that would require disclosure if run on television should be categorically exempt from the same requirements when placed in the Internet alone,” said FEC Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel in a past statement. “As a matter of policy, this simply does not make sense.”
It makes sense if you want to keep the Internet free, unlike everything else the government has ruined.
FEC Chairman Lee E. Goodman, a Republican, described what Ms. Ravel wants as something like a Chinese censorship board.
He said if regulation extends that far, then anybody who writes a political blog, runs a politically active news site or even chat room could be regulated. He added that funny internet campaigns like “Obama Girl,” and “Jib Jab” would also face regulations.
“I told you this was coming,” he told Secrets in 2014. He warned that Democrats on the panel were gunning for conservative Internet sites like the Drudge Report.
Read more on the link: