| SCORE: First Amendment 1; US Senate Democrats 0 |
|
|
|
| Written by Jeff Garvas | |
| Friday, 19 January 2007 | |
|
An amendment to United States Senate Bill number one (Section 220) almost succeeded in putting the brakes on grassroots activism. Yesterday, the US Senate stripped out language that would require "grassroots causes" and "bloggers" who communicate to 500 or more members of the public on policy matters to register and report quarterly to Congress. Had it become law, the best case would have been that Ohioans For Concealed Carry may have had to take intrusive and bureaucratic precautions when encouraging our members to support or oppose efforts by Congress. The worst case would have been to abandon those efforts entirely due to an inability to properly report our efforts on a quarterly basis. Those provisions may or may not have applied to this organization and its website columnists as well as any other gun rights group or online commentary about firearms in the United States. OFCC's email alert list, our incredibly popular Firearms Freedom Podcast, and our discussion forums alone would qualify as "communicating to 500 or more members of the public" - triggering an obligation to report our activities of grassroots activism to Congress as if we were a power house lobbying firm. However, unions and most corporations would be exempt since they'd communicate with their "members" as opposed to the general public. On January 9th, the Senate passed an amendment to the bill that would create criminal penalties. Online activists or organizations that failed to report themselves quarterly could be charged with a crime. At risk to those who didn't know better would be up to one year of jail time for the crime of exercising your First Amendment right to freedom of speech. When the Senate called the question, seven (7) Democrats joined all forty-eight (48) Republicans to repeal Section 220. Forty-three (43) Democrats voted to keep the restrictive provision in place. Ohio's Senate delegation was split. Voinovich voted to repeal and Senator Brown voted to retain the onerous reporting language. What should scare every freedom loving person is how this and the criminal penalties for political free speech managed to become a part of the bill in the first place. Worse yet, there are now forty-three Democrats on record who would make it a crime to speak your mind about political efforts to "too many" people. In other words, the more people your statements and political beliefs attract the less effective those Democrats want you to be. While large organizations like the National Rifle Association would most likely find ways to comply with such constitutional manipulation, smaller activist blogs and grassroots volunteer efforts like Ohioans For Concealed Carry would certainly be harmed the most -- effectively putting a muzzle on those who would fear prosecution and reconsider grassroots activism. |