The Federal Election Commission has dismissed complaints that two Internet bloggers violated campaign finance laws by advocating for certain candidates. [ruling can be found here]
The decision upholds previous FEC rulings that blogs fall under a media exemption prohibiting regulation of news stories, commentaries and editorials in both traditional and online format.
The commission ruled unanimously Tuesday that Kos Media, LLC, which operates the liberal blog DailyKos, and Michael L. Grace, whose blog reportedly advocated the defeat of Rep. Mary Bono, R-Calif., in the last election, did not violate any laws by creating and publishing such content. In doing so, it rejected the claim that blogs with distinct political leanings should be regulated as political committees.
the fec decided that "Activity on the DailyKos website does not constitute a contribution or expenditure that would trigger political committee status."
i am a voracious consumer of data. it's partly because i am a scientist, partly because i am innately curious, and partly because i am driven to understand the things in which i am interested. i wish i was interested in simple, or simplistic, things.
so when i saw this report that argues that republicans are happier than democrats, i had to take note. i'm interested in the differences between republicans and democrats, for a lot of reasons. i live in a mixed household (liberal democrat and a democrat turned republican turned independent), but also because i was utterly dismayed that the anti-war forces in this country were so disorganized that they didn't even factor in to bush's decision to invade iraq. this has been a constant theme over the last four years.
one of the things effected by this conclusion is wedge politics. hold on, we're in for a ride. if i don't make this abundantly clear, then let me know.
I'm prompted to write this in response to a comment made on my blog in response to my commentary on Peter Roskam's racist ads. A poster wrote, "the only good Roskam is a dead Roskam"...and the alarm bells went off.
I am not at all a fan of Peter Roskam's. I do not agree with his stance on the issues. I think his personal and legislative history shows him to be someone with a rather dishonorable past. I do not want him to be my Congressman. In fact, I'd rather that he not be in government at all.
But never in a million years would I be happy about it if Peter Roskam was to drop dead tomorrow. Never in a million years would I rejoice in a family's tragedy and a young life cut short. Never would I wish for someone to die because I deemed their choices in life to be wrong.
recently, i was asked by a couple of what i call uprooted volunteers what races i'd recommend for them to participate in this fall. these are people who travelled to iowa for dean and michigan, ohio and wisconsin for kerry. their focus is decidely national, less illinois-centric. this list (continued) is for people like them! part one, races ranked 1-5, can be found here.
these races are ranked based on an assessment of 1.) candidate, 2.) fund-raising, 3.) political environment, 4.) political climate, 5.) field organization, 6.) messaging, and 7.) potential impact on 2008. i've worked or advised campaigns in every one of these states except indiana (go figure) in the 2002 and 2004 election cycles, and have used that as part of this assessment.
....
donors and volunteers are valuable, and shouldn't have their time wasted:
three times in the past eight days i've been asked about how a potential volunteer and contributor should budget their time in campaigns within shouting distance of chicago. this isn't really an easy request. how you should spend *your* time and money should reflect your priorities, your ideological leanings, and your "vision" for the country. if you are really concerned about local things, even in so-called red districts, you should spend your time helping to build up your local party organization, regardless of your candidate's chances in the fall. think strategically, act locally.
meaning, how you spend your time and money doesn't have to be objective. an exercise like this one does.
(second in the series; the first one can be found here)
michael asks: How do we work to change the party then? Who's going to run for this seat? Who's going to have the resources to challenge? Who is going to hold her accountable for party unity when she votes with the GOP on key pieces of legislation that give the GOP the ability to claim "bi-partisanship" on the bill, and the ability to obfuscate the message Democrats project?
in the first diary, i tried to show how this is less about party unity (whatever that is) and more about power. changing the party is not magical, and we can't count on miracles. the conservative movement (and republicans) compromised to gain power, and progressives will have to, as well. you cannot change the party, let alone the country, without fighting for political power.
in this diary, i want to consider michael's third question: "Who's going to have the resources to challenge?" again, i want to take this discussion away from the specifics of melissa bean and focus on a general discussion of how progressives can act as a spearhead for change.
A few posts down, there was a diary about the anti-marriage initiative that will be on the ballot in Illinois if we don't do anything to stop it.
I don't know about you, but I not only don't want discrimination written into my state's constitution, but I also don't want to give the Illinois Family Institute and other right wing groups in this state who are trying to push for this an opportunity to spout their bigoted views. Already, Protect Marriage Illinois Project Manager David E. Smith called gay and lesbian families “an infection that is dangerous to the absolute institution of marriage”. If this is on the ballot, we can look forward to several months of gay-bashing as the right wing works to get their supporters to the polls.
The good news is that we can do something to stop them.
Information about how to volunteer is in the extended text:
In OH-06, State Sen. Charlie Wilson's campaign and the DCCC...
-- found more than over 900 volunteers
-- made 281,522 calls
-- knocked on 41,758 doors
-- sent more than 4K personalized letters to absentee ballot requesters
-- sent more than 380K pieces of mail
-- went on TV in all 4 media markets, including being on TV in the largest two markets for over 3 weeks.
All for a Dem congressional primary
wilson represents a cautionary tale, one i think people really need to take to heart. charlie wilson was the dccc's candidate from the start. as such, he heard the typical song: "raise money, raise money, raise mo' money." nothing wrong with that -- as far as it goes.
but wilson's campaign, focused on pleasing rahm, and lost track of it's other goals -- thus failed to get 50 valid signatures. they got more than 90, but only 48 withstood challenge. petition signatures just wasn't that important -- rahm was dictating the pace and direction of the campaign.
("I would just like point out that the comparisons for the 14th District show one candidate's March 1 report vs. the other candidate's Dec. 31 report. However, kudos to the candidate who has raised more funds." peacenoodles
- promoted by Kankakee Voice)
Daily Herald and Beacon News reports on campaign finances today. Here are a couple of races I'm following:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.