Dollar value on free speech

R.K. Printed in Daily Review Atlas, today


"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
-First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, ratified 1791


Over the past months, I have extolled the virtue of blogs, bloggers, and blogging. I like the immediacy of checking data via an internet hypertext link, of being able to read all sides of an issue in a single afternoon without going to the newsstand or the library to pick up thirty-seven different publications, of being able to comment and have my comments viewed and reviewed by people whose opinions I respect (as well as those I don’t) right then and there. Personally, I like the internet -- and, of course, blogging -- because they provide unrestrained forums for discussion.

Many of us have recognized that web logs are, quite possibly, the future of fact-checking both for the mainstream media and for the general populace. Even ABC tv news guys admitted it, in good-natured fashion, this week, at the conclusion of Tuesday night’s “Nightline” about bloggers and their impact. The most successful blogs have proven their worth, already. But, as the adage states, no good deed goes unpunished.

Four years ago, the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act (better known as “McCain-Feingold”, after its Senate sponsors) was made effective. With that, America had the first real step in unlawful restriction of political speech, by limiting who can contribute and how much he can give to a political candidate’s or party’s campaign. Sadly, when it came time to decide that an unconstitutional law had been passed, the Supreme Court sat on their hands. Things went downhill from there. Instead of forcing political donations into the light of day, where we, the people, could see who might be pulling the strings, the Act forced the puppet masters underground, into such systems as the so-called 527s, among other underhanded political machinery and chicanery. The only way many of us found out who was involved in the manipulation of media via those ads was by that “bunch of guys in their pajamas”, the bloggers, who provided direct links to campaign websites, to organization websites, publicly accessible Portable Document Format files (PDFs), and to posted official e-mails, so we could make up our own minds without all the requisite propaganda getting in the way.

Now, this season we start a new chapter in undermining free speech. The Federal Election Commission, in continuing to define, enforce, and reinforce McCain-Feingold, took the case against the internet to court, and Judge Colleen Kollar-Ketelly decided against internet users. The decision was that internet is not to be included in the exemptions that are granted to the mainstream media. In other words, while the Daily Review Atlas may print a political opinion piece which directly quotes a candidate or party document, should I, in turn, choose to post a direct link to that same document or quote on the internet, as a private citizen, it can be construed as a gift of advertising, and have a dollar value attached to it.

Let us pretend that each time somebody reads my weblog, gets to one of my links, and follows it to the source, the official value of that action is placed at five dollars. The more people read my blog and click on the link I provide, the greater the monetary value of my link. Let us now pretend that I am as inflammatory, insightful or as popular a blogger as Instapundit.com, littlegreenfootballs.com (and what a lovely dream it is!), or even irrational left-wing dailykos.com. In my blog I put up a hypertext link to the website of (for the sake of argument) Barack Obama’s campaign. What I’ve said has caused people to want to see for themselves what Obama’s site says. As we have already noted, McCain-Feingold has put a cap on private political gifts. At five dollars a link, I’ve just maxed to the limit my entire campaign donations in three hours. Due to McCain-Feingold, supported by Judge Kollar-Ketelly and the FEC, I can’t post another link to him, or make another direct, documented reference to him for the rest of the year, or I will be breaking the law, and may be punished with fines or even jail time. Obama can do anything, say anything, and I can no longer post any comments that I can back up with substantiating links, because McCain-Feingold told me I “already gave enough” to his campaign.

Apparently, the plan is that, when Congress and the Supreme Court are through, the only people with the right to continually and publicly express a political opinion, and support it with original documents, will be the Mainstream Media and the professional politicians. So much for the First Amendment.