April 25, 2006Another View of Lobbying ReformFollowing up on this post, linking to this letter from a coalition of reform groups, Mark Fitzgibbons writes:
Contrary to proponents of regulating the grassroots, the Senate-passed provisions do not target paid professional and "Astroturf" grassroots communications. The registration and reporting requirements would apply to: (1) communications to the public prepared in-house by small, community based organizations that even rely on volunteers, (2) communications prepared by those who neither retain professional K Street lobbyists, nor who make political contributions, (3) books, blogs and broadcasts, (4) faith-based communications, and (5) those who attempt to avoid entanglements with Jack Using the justifications of the "watchdog" groups that billions of dollars are spent, and therefore it is appropriate to require registration and reporting of communications to as few as 500 people, then mainstream publication and journalistic endeavors should be required to comply. That, however, may be the case. As explained in my written testimony to the Subcommittee on the Judiciary, and a separate Summary of the grassroots provisions of S. 2349, the placement of the editorial by The watchdogs need to stop misleading the public about the targets and effects of their legislation. Besides the constitutional flaws of their proposal seeking citizens and grassroots causes to obtain congressional "permission" to speak and publish, the bill would not regulate paid professional and Astroturf communications any more than the smallest of small citizen critics of the Washington establishment who expressly avoid hiring lobbyists. Mark J. Fitzgibbons Posted by Rick Hasen at April 25, 2006 02:18 PM |