Forum Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Forum Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Forum Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Forum Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| (US) 7/07 - Should Daily Kos be subj... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 6488
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, July 26, 2007 - 8:01 am: | 
|
From BBV admin: This article raises an interesting point, one I'd been wondering about as well. Both Daily Kos and Democratic Underground have a stated purpose of electing Democrats and both raise funds for Democrats. This humongous thread at DU makes that clear: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389 x1422881 - in addition, though not reported by the article below, a Political Action Committee (PAC) called blogPAC lists expenditures to Daily Kos. Below this post is a rebuttal and below that is a fascinating article about the real roots of the owner of Daily Kos.
BlogCritics Magazine - 25 Jul 2007
http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2007/07/25/should-the-dailykos-be-subject- to-the-federal-election-commission/
Should The DailyKos Be Subject To The Federal Election Commission?
Today I [blogcritics magazine] filed an Federal Election Commission (FEC) complaint against Kos Media, LLC., better known as DailyKos.com. I allege that they operate as a political committee and are therefore subject to FEC rules.
I first thought of this complaint during the Cindy Sheehan debacle over at Daily Kos, where Cindy pledged to run as an independent against Nancy Pelosi, and the Daily Kos basically turned on her. While some conservatives took great delight in this, I really didn’t care because it’s politics as usual. The right has thrown their fair share of people under the bus for not drinking the Kool-aid too.
However, the statement that the DailyKos was about electing Democrats stuck with me. I always assumed it was a standard left-wing group blog spouting the latest and greatest in left-wing diatribe. However, the statement that the blog exists to get Democrats elected is repeated in various places around the site, including statements by Kos himself.
Federal Election Commission rules apply for organizations that spend or contribute an equivalent of $1,000 per year in trying to influence elections for federal office. DailyKos is owned by Kos Media, a company, which makes it fit the definition of an organization. It surely spends at least $1,000 per year in hosting and based on what they charge (and get) for advertising, their support of candidates is certainly worth over $1,000 per year. Lastly, their self-identified purpose is to influence elections in the Democrats favor. They fit the criteria.
Some will argue that this is a slippery slope that will snare all bloggers. First, most bloggers aren’t organizations. Second, most bloggers are read by like 3 people and their posts are certainly not worth $1,000. Third, most bloggers don’t exist for the primary purpose of electing certain people to federal office.
A better question to ask is can a political committee avoid campaign regulations by simply organizing in the form of a blog? Surely not.
There is also debate on the prudence of the various election laws and whether or not they are helpful or harmful to our democratic republic. This debate is all fine and interesting but that doesn’t mean partisan sites can flout the law simply because they don’t like it. Most of the federal election laws people don’t have a problem with, such as the laws requiring disclosure. That is all this complaint is about, that the DailyKos needs to file disclosure reports to the FEC, just like every other political committee out there.
In the end, the DailyKos is bound by its own statement that it exists to elect Democrats. They’ve made themselves subject to the FEC when they decided to be an arm of the Democratic Party. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 6489
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, July 26, 2007 - 8:06 am: |
|
Rebuttal from Daily Kos:
http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2007/07/25/daily-kos-wanker-of-the-year-bl ogosphere-division/
Daily Kos: Wanker of the Year, Blogosphere Division
By Daily Kos.
quote:Today I filed an Federal Election Commission (FEC) complaint against Kos Media, LLC., better known as DailyKos.com. I allege that they operate as a political committee and are therefore subject to FEC rules.
But wait! you think. Didn't I just live through 2005 and 2006, and didn’t the FEC do something to prevent this? Indeed, they did.
First, in late 2005, they issued an advisory opinion to the FiredUp sites which confirmed that a site exactly like this one qualified as a "press entity" exempt from federal election law. The reform groups argued before the FEC that "an organization whose stated purpose is to be the functional equivalent of a partisan campaign organization — to elect Democratic candidates and to solicit contributions for such candidates — does not qualify for the press exemption." The FEC rejected this argument, unanimously, describing a site that might sound very familiar to you:
quote:Fired Up is a for-profit LLC and is not owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate. Given that Fired Up's operation of its websites is at the core of its activities as a press entity, its provision of news stories, commentary, and editorials on its websites falls within Fired Up's legitimate press function. Thus, because Fired Up is a press entity, and neither it nor its websites are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate, the costs Fired Up incurs in covering or carrying a news story, commentary, or editorial on its websites are exempt from the definitions of "contribution" and "expenditure." The Commission notes that an entity otherwise eligible for the press exception would not lose its eligibility merely because of a lack of objectivity in a news story, commentary, or editorial, even if the news story, commentary, or editorial expressly advocates the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate for Federal office. See First General Counsel's Report, MUR 5440 (CBS Broadcasting, Inc.) ("Even seemingly biased stories or commentary by a press entity can fall within the media exemption.")
Because the costs aren't counted as contributions or expenditures, you never reach the political committee question Bambenek claims. Indeed, as FEC commissioner Ellen Weintraub told Salon.com two years ago, even before the new regulations or the FiredUp opinion, "People like Red State [a prominent conservative blog] or Kos clearly fall under the media exemption … Practically all bloggers — I can't think of one who wouldn't — would fall under the media exemption or the volunteer. And that's if we do nothing, if we don’t change the rules at all."
Moreover, the FEC regulations codified in March 2006 both reaffirmed the broad media exemption and created a vast protection for volunteer activities on behalf of candidates — if you're not compensated by the campaign, it doesn't count as a contribution to the campaign — even if you're a group or incorporated as an LLC. (See p. 25 of the PDF, 11 C.F.R. §§ 100.73, 100.94, 100.132 and 100.155.)
Let's be clear: hypothetical-but-now-sadly-real complaints like this are precisely why we banded together with RedState and sites across the blogosphere, to ensure that no site of any ideological stripe has to face threats like this, so that election seasons don't become tit-for-tat complaints across the Internet that end up shutting down online activism.
Markos has asked me to represent him should the FEC even require a response, and as you can see I've been trying to reason with this guy. If Bambenek persists in this quest and refuses to withdraw his complaint, I will vigorously defend this site, and pursue any legal means available to recover from Bambenek the costs of defending against something which seeks to stifle the speech of every member of the site. This aggression will not stand. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 6490
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, July 26, 2007 - 8:20 am: |
|
From BBV admin: this fascinating series of articles documents a relationship between Daily Kos owner Markos Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA and a wealthy and powerful Central American family, and the surprising admission that shortly before he launched Daily Kos, Markos Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA took a 6-month training course with the CIA and characterized his politics as "to the right of the DLC" (see auditape of commonwealth club speech, linked here: http://www.commonwealthclub.org/archive/06/06-06zuniga-audio.html.
http://francislholland.blogspot.com/2007/07/why-has-markos-moulitsas-mamz-lied-t o.html
Why Has Markos Moulitsas (M.A.M.Z.) Lied to Us About His Salvadoran Oligarchy Family Background?
...I refer to Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA as "MAMZ" simply because these are the initials of his full name, and because typing "MAMZ" requires five keystrokes while typing his full name requires thirty-four keystrokes (including the accent over the "U" and the tilde over the "Ñ" in "ZÚÑIGA." As with John F. Kennedy (JFK), Robert F. Kennedy (RFK) and Martin Luther King (MLK), it is perfectly appropriate and respectful in our society to refer to political figures by their initials.)
Much harder to reconcile than the question of MAMZ's initials are the reasons why the financial and biographical details that MAMZ has offered us about himself and his family simply do not add up....
http://francislholland.blogspot.com/2007/07/markos-moulitsas-family-business.htm l
July 18, 2007
Markos Moulitsas' "Family Business" Pollutes Unique Salvadoran Estuary, Theatens Wildlife
In April of this year, Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA told La Prensa Gráfica, "I don’t have money. I don’t come from a famous or powerful family." Recently we have learned that none of this is true. In fact, contrary to what Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA has said, his family in El Salvador is wealthy and important enough to be one of the biggest environmental polluters of the Jaltepeque Estuary, where the family owns and operates a multi-million dollar hotel and subdividision conglomerate that is polluting a precious ecosystem.
...
http://francislholland.blogspot.com/2007/07/francis-l-holland-to-attend-yearlyko s.html
Francis L. Holland to Attend YearlyKos, Lead "Truth About Kos" Panel Discussion
...In a carefully negotiated deal worked out through intermediaries, Francis L. Holland and Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA have agreed to end their public acrimony and work together for the good of the Democratic Party. Without admitting guilt, Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA has agreed to do the following:
1) Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA will sever any and all contacts with the Central Intelligence Agency
http://francislholland.blogspot.com/2007/07/in-comments-to-my-diary-of-weekend-s tu.html
July 16, 2007
Why Black People Don't Get Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA (M.A.M.Z.) of DailyKos
The reason I offered the two links in that diary to Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA's (M.A.M.Z.'s) articles and quotes attacking Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama is to show that Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA (M.A.M.Z) is making a living criticizing Democratic front-runners... |
|
|
