Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

  1. #1
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    the Senate recently passed a new ethics bill ...




    The senate ethics bill sounds wonderful on the surface, until you realize the potential impact of the fine print. Under the new senate bill, any organization that advocates changes in congressional policy and that also addresses an audience of over 500 'members of the general public' must now register as a lobbyist in order to avoid a potential $100,000 fine. Registering as a lobbyist of course requires that full public accounting and disclosure be made of the groups finances and political contributions. With a cutoff of 500 'members', this potentially means that any webmaster/blogger with over 500 readers, any preacher with over 500 congregation members, any grass roots neighborhood group with more than 500 neighbors etc., will now be subject to a potential $100,000 fine if they comment on matters coming before Congress / criticize current members of Congress in conjunction with such matters with the intent of influencing decisions of congressional members without first officially registering as a lobbyist and making a full financial disclosure available to the public.

  2. #2
    God/dess dlabtot's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2005
    Location
    in your dreams, in my nightmares
    Posts
    2,085
    Thanks
    59
    Thanked 139 Times in 85 Posts

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    the Senate recently passed a new ethics bill ...
    Why do almost all of your posts contain glaring and obvious errors of fact?

    NO, the Senate has not passed this ethics bill, and there is a good chance it won't pass:

    January 18, 2007

    CONCORD, N.H. --Sen. Judd Gregg defended a proposed amendment that derailed a major ethics and lobbying bill pushed by Democrats, saying Thursday it would help control wasteful spending.

    Most Republicans voted not to proceed with the ethics bill after West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd, a Democrat, threatened to block Gregg's amendment, which would have given the president the authority, with congressional approval, to cut individual spending items.

    Democratic and Republican leaders were still hoping to get the ethics bill back on track after it failed, 51-46, to clear a procedural hurdle that required 65 votes, but the prospects looked dim.
    http://www.boston.com/news/local/new...e_ethics_bill/
    geez......

  3. #3
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    There will be a constitutional crisis in our times.

  4. #4
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    ^^^ you really ought to read your own links ...

    (snip)"With the dispute resolved, the bill passed the Senate on Thursday night, 96-2. Under the bill, senators will give up gifts and free travel from lobbyists, pay more for travel on corporate jets and make themselves more accountable for the pet projects they insert into bills."(snip)

    ... and unpaid poorly funded grass roots lobbying groups will also give up their right to publicly advocate policy changes in Washington without paying $100,000 in accounting fees first or $100,000 in fines afterwards ! But hey, that means fewer jam-ups at the Congressional switchboard and fax machines, and fewer differing viewpoints to interfere with the professional paid lobbyists who work for MoveOn.org and the NRA !


    I would add that this sort of railroading of new legislation without thorough debate (i.e. Nancy Pelosi's 100 hours) is exactly the same sort of legislative technique that gave us an income tax, a Federal Reserve Bank, Fiat Money and confiscation of gold from US citizens (FDR 2 days after taking office in 1933) and countless other things that were arguably contrary to 'original' constitutional principles.

  5. #5
    God/dess Sirona's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,012
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 46 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    ^^^ you really ought to read your own links ...

    (snip)"With the dispute resolved, the bill passed the Senate on Thursday night, 96-2. Under the bill, senators will give up gifts and free travel from lobbyists, pay more for travel on corporate jets and make themselves more accountable for the pet projects they insert into bills."(snip)

    ... and unpaid poorly funded grass roots lobbying groups will also give up their right to publicly advocate policy changes in Washington ! But hey, that means fewer jam-ups at the Congressional switchboard and fax machines, and fewer differing viewpoints to interfere with the paid lobbyists who work for MoveOn.org and the NRA !
    Aw, you mean he was wrong? Big surprise.



  6. #6
    God/dess dlabtot's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2005
    Location
    in your dreams, in my nightmares
    Posts
    2,085
    Thanks
    59
    Thanked 139 Times in 85 Posts

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    Yes, Thursday night, after I made my post, they passed the bill. Kudos to the Boston Globe for updating their article. Yes, it's the same link, but as you can see by the quoted sections, the content is different.

    As to the substance of the original post, it makes the false claim that

    "any webmaster/blogger with over 500 readers, any preacher with over 500 congregation members, any grass roots neighborhood group with more than 500 neighbors etc., will now be subject to a potential $100,000 fine if they comment on matters coming before Congress"

    However, if you look at the actual bill, you will see that is simply untrue

    To be covered under this, you have to be hired by someone in order to stimulate 'grassroots lobbying' - .and - receives income of, or spends or agrees to spend, an aggregate of $25,000 or more for such efforts in any quarterly period

    So if someone is paying you the equivalent of $100000 per year to blog, you might have something to worry about. - but that's not free speech, it's paid speech.

    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.

    `(1 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((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(1, 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(1, 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://thomas.loc.gov
    Last edited by dlabtot; 01-19-2007 at 11:54 AM.

  7. #7
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    the mydd link takes the position that any group that spends any amount of money to promote a measure that would prompt 500+ people to contact their senator / representative constitutes 'paid' grassroots lobbying. That 'paid' lobbying therefore begins with the purchase of an advertisement, TV / radio air time, web server bandwidth etc. Your implication that a grassroots lobbying effort without paid lobbyists ( without engaging a 'grassroots lobbying firm' in the bill's jargon) is somehow exempt is in error. Such unpaid lobbying efforts still constitute 'paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying' under the bill's jargon as soon as those unpaid lobbyists spend money on advertisements, TV / radio air time, web server bandwidth, or essentially any type of communications besides standing on a soap box in the middle of the street.

    As to any cutoff in expenditures, the language of the bill specifically addresses how to report lobbying expenditures in amounts less than $10,000 thus your implication that groups who spend less than $25,000 do not have to register as lobbyists, do not have to report their finances and political affiliations, and are not subject to a potential $100,000 fine are also in error. "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" just about covers that issue in one sentence ! Such a group still has to register, still has to perform the accounting, and still has to do the reporting (and incur the costs involved)

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 01-19-2007 at 07:00 PM.

  8. #8
    God/dess NinaDaisy's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    3,432
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    This is the funniest fucking thing I've read in a while. With the way the GOP has basically wiped their asses with the Constitution over the last 6 years? You have GOT to be kidding me.
    "She has written so well, and marvellously well, that I was completely ashamed of myself as a writer...But this girl, who is to my knowledge very unpleasant and we might even say a high-grade bitch, can write rings around all of us who consider ourselves as writers"

    Ernest Hemingway on writer, aviation pioneer and horse trainer Beryl Markham


  9. #9
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    just out of curiosity Nina what constitutional trashings in particular are you referring to ?

  10. #10
    God/dess dlabtot's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2005
    Location
    in your dreams, in my nightmares
    Posts
    2,085
    Thanks
    59
    Thanked 139 Times in 85 Posts

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    the mydd link takes the position that any group that spends any amount of money to promote a measure that would prompt 500+ people to contact their senator / representative constitutes 'paid' grassroots lobbying.

    ~
    it's unfortunate that you are unwilling to read the plain language of the bill for yourself, which I posted above, and which clearly states that this provision only applies to

    (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.'.
    That's what the bill says. But acknowledging that fact wouldn't fit your partisan agenda, would it?

    So continue to let the Natl Coalition of Mental Health Care Professionals and Consumers do your thinking for you....

  11. #11
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    as much as you may not want to concede the point, this bill goes much farther than you are attempting to imply ...



    (snip)"Under Senate Bill One and its House companion bill H.R. 4682 an organization is classified as a “grassroots lobbying firm” if it attempts to influence the general public to contact federal officials in order to express their own views on a federal issue. It must spend only only $50,000 ($25,000 under the House bill) for such efforts in a quarterly period, it will be required to register as lobbyists. Many radio programs and websites easily spend that amount of money in the course of their activities."(snip)

    (snip)"It's interesting to note that if Senate Bill One were currently law, writing this would be illegal because we had not filed the proper paperwork with the federal government. Assaults like this on the First Amendment and the right of the people to have free speech and seek redress must not to be tolerated in whatever form they appear.

    There is debate among legal experts as to exactly how the provisions of Senate Bill One could ultimately be interpreted and applied, which brings us down to a rule of thumb: If we can't agree what this means as a bill now, we definitely don't want it as law later emphasis added ."(snip)

  12. #12
    God/dess dlabtot's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2005
    Location
    in your dreams, in my nightmares
    Posts
    2,085
    Thanks
    59
    Thanked 139 Times in 85 Posts

    Default Re: Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...

    Melonie, your attempts to deny reality are pathetic.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 38
    Last Post: 04-25-2007, 03:46 PM
  2. Senate Democrats strike a blow to Free Speech ...
    By Melonie in forum Member Boards
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-18-2007, 04:33 PM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-27-2006, 05:32 PM
  4. Free Speech
    By VADEN in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-07-2004, 03:35 PM
  5. Lap dances and free speech
    By in forum General Board
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-11-2003, 11:04 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •