zenpundit.com

Ultraguy, who blogs at New Wineskins, was as unhappy as I was about the proposed new rules for internet usage by ongressman, so he wrote a letter to his, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and received this response from Congressman Frank, one of the House’s more liberal members:

Dear Mr. [ultraguy],

I had not been aware of this issue of linkages to Member’s websites and I am not supportive of restrictions here. I must say that I do not think that restricting what Members can link to in their websites is or will lead to “tyranny,” but I have generally been for no restrictions on speech and that is the perspective from which I start. There is a need to keep Members of Congress from subsidizing blatantly political activity with public funds, but I do not think that there needs to be this degree of restriction and I will be talking to my colleagues on the subject in the next couple of weeks. In fact, I wish people who are opposed to restrictions in one area had a consistent view in opposing restrictions on freedom of expression everywhere. That has generally been my position and I will maintain it here as well.

BARNEY FRANK

Ultraguy was not entirely satisfied with this stance but considering that Frank and Capuano come from the same state delegation I’m pleased to see Rep. Frank inclined to use his seniority to lobby against implementing such regulations, sponsored as they are by a close colleague. My own Congressman has yet to even respond to my inquiry. Sad.

Hat tip of the day goes to Ultraguy and to Representative Barney Frank!

I have an op-ed/article up this morning at Pajamas Media on the Culberson-Capuano internet rules dispute:

Congress Debates Muzzling Congressmen Online

….There is certainly a legitimate and longstanding interest in preventing the misuse of federal employees or funds by prohibiting them from having any connection to campaign activities, a point on which Republicans and Democrats can easily agree. Furthermore, Capuano is correct to call the current rules “antiquated” and more restrictive, on paper at least, than his proposals. However, the old rules have been widely ignored by congressmen and have never been enforced, which left members of the House free to post online and engage in virtual interaction as they pleased. Enforcing the new, somewhat milder restrictions, as Capuano intends to do, amounts to a severe regime of prior restraint on speech.

More ominous still would be the precedent of the U.S. government designating “official” external websites – imagine having the power to select “official” newspapers – that would have to hew to House regulations and be as free as possible from political or commercial advertising. Given the ubiquity of blogads, most blogs, bulletin boards, and discussion forums would be shut out of the conversation with our nation’s elected officials. Essentially, Capuano is demanding that the internet adapt itself to the House of Representatives instead of the House adapting to the reality of the internet.

Read the rest here.

In addition to the posts on this issue this weekend by Matt Stoller and Mark Tapscott, my friend Lexington Green points to this new piece calling for a bipartisan coalition by Patrick Ruffini at The Next Right.

This may cause my friend Jeremy some dismay, but he gets a hat tip for this link:

Democrat Michael Capuano Tries to Stop Members of Congress from Using the Internet

Speaker Pelosi weighed in on the matter:

“We share the goal of modernizing the antiquated franking regulations to address the rapidly changing realities of communications in the internet age. Like many other Members, I have a blog, use YouTube, Flickr, Facebook, Digg, and other new media to communicate with constituents, and I believe they are vital tools toward increasing transparency and accountability.”

So Pelosi is good on this stuff, as she should be.  She has an exceptionally talented New Media staff who can do great work because there are no Franking Restrictions on leadership offices.  The right is largely correct on the substance of their claims, though they are making some partisan accusations that aren’t grounded in a real understanding the problem.  Soren Dayton at the Next Right asserts that Pelosi is violating the rules through her use of social media, because he didn’t know that leadership offices aren’t subjected to the rules.  What is actually going on is that Pelosi’s excellent use of blogging, YouTube, Flickr, Facebook, and Digg is unwittingly providing an extremely successful pilot for how members and committees can and should use the web to interact.

I had not realized that either and I thank Matt Stoller for the information in his post. If Speaker Nancy Pelosi uses her considerable authority to push through better, common sense, rules for the House to allow rank and file members to have the online presence that she has created, I’ll be more than happy to retract my previous remarks and apologize.

Was admitted to the beta test version of uber-cool Sliderocket.

About damn time. Unfortunately, it’s too late to start fiddling with some of my old powerpoints. Have to do that this weekend.

I thought the internet rules issue for the House of Representatives might be dying down when Rep. Capuano issued a heated denial of intending to censor or restrict access to social media. Unfortunately, that denial contrasts 180 degrees with what Rep. Culberson claimed was said by Capuano at a meeting on the subject:

“Cong Capuano confirmed to me today that rule will limit Member video posts to approved sites w approved content w disclaimer &  He said text/blogs/Twitter social media sites next. My analysis correct: we could only post approved content on approved sites w disclaimer Twitter would be prohibited to Congressmen because We the People are free to post political comments recommending who to vote for or against”

We are now down to the point where one congressman or the other can only be a liar. It should be evident as to whom within a few days.

If you are inclined to believe, as am I, that the Democratic Party leadership fears that their longterm electoral and legislative success depends upon restoring at least some semblance of the liberal dominance over public debate that prevailed in the pre-internet, pre-talk radio, pre-cable TV days by rejiggering the rules of the game, reviving the “fairness doctrine” and initiating regulations on political speech online – then you might wish to check out Let Our Congress Tweet.