New lobbying bill to criminalize political bloggers?

One of the Democratic priorities for the new Congress was passage of a lobbyist reform bill, but the introduction of S.1 into the Senate has caused a veritable firestorm of controversy. That's because section 220 of the bill introduces disclosure requirements for "paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying." The Traditional Values Coalition calls this section the "most expansive intrusion on First Amendment rights ever proposed in the United States Senate," while GrassrootsFreedom.com chairman Richard Viguerie says that if it passes, "We'd be living under totalitarianism, not democracy." But are these accurate statements, or is truth the first casualty of rhetoric?

S.1 would change the rules for lobbyists. It bans all gifts from lobbyists, imposes restrictions on trips and accommodation offered to elected officials, and requires all "earmarks" to be identified in spending bills, according to the Congressional Budget Office. But the bill also wants to bring disclosure requirements to the murky world of astroturf groups (so-called because they mimic real grassroots organizations). This is certainly a noble goal; undisclosed corporate money washes through so many front groups now that it can be difficult to tell when opinions are genuine and when they are bought and sold.

Section 220 of the bill "would require grassroots causes, even bloggers, who communicate to 500 or more members of the public on policy matters, to register and report quarterly to Congress the same as the big K. Street lobbyists," said Viguerie in a statement, but the truth isn't that simple.

So what's in the bill?

Section 220 introduces a series of modifications to the 1995 Lobbying Disclosure Act. The most important is that "paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying" now counts as "lobbying" under certain circumstances. Currently, lobbyists are only considered as such if they have contact with elected officials or staff members. Should the new bill become law, disclosure and reporting requirements for lobbyists would be extended to groups who attempt to influence the general public to contact legislators.

This is what has inspired claims that bloggers and activists of all stripes will suddenly be classed as lobbyists and will be monitored by the government. What the bill says, though, is that the rules only apply to people who are paid by clients to encourage the public to contact Congress about specific legislation. The rules do not apply to any communication directed at less than 500 people, they do not apply to any communication directed at a group's current membership, and they do not impose any speech regulations (all that is required is a quarterly report describing where one's money came from and what bills were worked on).

Would this apply to a political blogger? Not usually. Because section 220 is only a series of changes to the Lobbying Disclosure Act, that legislation's other rules still apply. According to OMB Watch, a government accountability watchdog group, the LDA's registration requirement is only triggered by groups that spend more than $24,500 on lobbying semiannually and employ a least one person who spends 20 percent or more of their work time on lobbying. The bill also concerns only the federal government; groups operating at the state level are exempt.

Hmmm so if I don't make money or get money for my blog I am OK. Well thank GOD. I make jack from it and anyway only have 2 reads, y wife and my dog. And I force the dog to read it. I know I know, animal cruelty. But hey, the dog likes it.