Good Question: Why do Congressional Democrats fear free speech?
This entire piece is written by Ed Morrissey :
Efforts in both chambers of Congress have Republicans wondering why Democrats seem to fear free speech. Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA) has proposed limitations on how Representatives can post information to the Internet in a time when we should be demanding more transparency, not less. According to a source in the Senate, Dianne Feinstein has begun her own campaign to force Senators to seek permission before communicating over the Internet.
Soren Dayton at The Next Right has the story from the House:
In typical fashion, House Democrats are trying to pass rules that stifle debate and require regulation. Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA) sent a letter to the Chairman of the Committee on House Administration Robert Brady (D-PA). The letter is a response to a debate about whether the House should allow members to use YouTube, first raised by Rep. Kevin McCarthy back in April. :
Well, Capuano’s proposal is a disaster. It creates a list of sites, maintained by the Committee on House Administration that members are allowed to post material. Except, those sites have a caveat:
To the maximum extent possible, official content should not be posted on a website or page where it may appear with commercial or political information or any other information not in compliance with the House’s content guidelines.
In the Senate, the problem gets even worse. Feinstein (D-CA) would have the Rules Committee act as a censor board, forcing members to get approval for the act of communicating on external websites. Further, it would appear that the Feinstein proposal would attempt to exercise editorial control over these sites, at least indirectly.
As my source put it, these are the key issues:
- Under their scheme, the Senate Rules Committee would become the Internet speech police for everyone in the Senate.
- It will be up to the committee to “sanction” which websites and forms of communication they deem appropriate.
- The Rules Committee thus gets to pick winners and losers among various websites in terms of which are appropriate for use.
- The Rules Committee would get to regulate communication through any site not ending in “senate.gov,” which would include sites like YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter.
- Further, this could jeopardize guest posts at sites like RedState and Townhall.
- The Rules Committee would require senators to moderate “any public commentary” which would likely mean regulating comments on guest posts and YouTube videos, among other things.
It also raises a number of questions:
- Would this rule extend beyond comments to posts on the site?
- Would it affect Slatecard & BlogAds?
- How about something like The Ed Morrissey Show, which has a live chatroom? Would that have to be moderated?
- The Rules Committee would get to act as the “Content KGB” since it can require the removal of content in violation of Senate Rules. And who determines what’s in violation? The Rules Committee.
- There are no similar controls on any other form of communication with the public, such as publishing op-eds in newspapers or appearing on radio or television.
The sudden interest in silencing Congress goes right along with the brand-new 9% approval rating the Democratic leadership has earned Congress. Imagine how much worse it will get when they gag their members and force an end to communication through policy sites, blogs, and Internet media.
Want to ask Feinstein what she’s thinking? Be sure to e-mail her through her website or call the Senate Rules Committee at 202-224-6352 to express your support for free speech and transparency. Ask them what they have to hide that the 9% of Americans who still support them shouldn’t find out.
Update: And let’s not forget Feinstein’s other policy goal ” re-establishment of the Fairness Doctrine. Hmmmm. Can we detect a pattern here?
Update II: Soren had the identity of the House Administration Committee chair. It’s Robert Brady, not Kevin Brady, a Republican from Texas. I’ve updated the reference in the quoted material.
From Pam: It will be business as usual when leaking highly sensitive and or classified data to the MSM for political gain against aRepublican! You can bank on that!
Loading ...
July 9, 2008 - 10:47 PM on July 9th, 2008
Why, what do you mean? Democrats, Leftists of all types have been champions of free speech* since the 1960s!
*Free speech being defined as only that which fits within their dogmatic parameters.
July 10, 2008 - 10:28 PM on July 10th, 2008
Stifling communication and confiscating weapons are always the first steps in a fascist’s rise to power.
July 12, 2008 - 07:07 AM on July 12th, 2008
Exactly FAO. That is why the Supreme Court ruling on the gun ban should have been 9-0. The fact that it wasn’t should be alarming to all. If this Fairness Doctrine passes it will certainly put a “chill wind” in the air as Mr. A hole Robbins liked to say.
July 13, 2008 - 09:49 AM on July 13th, 2008
Thomas Jefferson said that one of the greatest reasons to allow the citizenry to keep and bear arms was so that they could protect themselves from tyranny in government. How else could you describe the BS that’s coming out of the Democrat controlled House and Senate these days? How else do you describe the taking of one person’s wealth to redistribute it to those who refuse to earn their own? If an IRS agent walks into your home, demands that you give him an exorbitant amoung of money and you refuse, he takes you to prison, confiscates your belongings and sells them. If a person without an IRS badge even tries the same, HE goes to prison. When the IRS does it, the government calls it justice. When anyone other than the IRS does it, it’s called kidnapping and extortion.
Did anyone else hear what happened to Richard Hatch, the winner of the original “Survivor” series? He failed to pay taxes on the $1,000,000 prize and a follow up speaking honorarium and ended up in jail for 54 months and owing the government more than $1,000,000 in taxes, fines, and interest. How is that possible in a free country?
The Democrats in Congress are holding up a bill that would limit the powers of the BATFE to harass people attending gun shows. Sometime in the last two years (I don’t remember exactly when or I’d say so) BATFE agents in VA were stopping people coming out of gun shows, confiscating their LEGALLY PURCHASED firearms, telling them that the purchase had been illegal and forcing them to come down to the BATFE office to recover their ILLEGALLY confiscated firearms. They had also been going around undercover and trying to dissuade people from buying handguns. THAT IS NOT THE FUNCTION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, OR ANY GOVERNMENT FOR THAT MATTER. The DEMS in Congress see nothing wrong with it.
July 13, 2008 - 01:00 PM on July 13th, 2008
imo the Democrite party is the enemy of everything that made America great. The Democrapic Party is the enemy of Liberty. The Demotratior party is the domestic enemy, the enemy of America.