[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 73 (Monday, June 6, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6095-S6096]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      ONLINE FREEDOM OF SPEECH ACT

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to express my support for the 
Online Freedom of Speech Act which my colleague Senator Reid has 
introduced. This legislation clarifies the campaign finance legislation 
of 2002 in order to restore freedom of speech to the Internet.
       The Internet is more than a remarkable new technology. It's 
     a means of bringing people together. I read somewhere that 
     the most important time in a person's development is the 
     first 5 years. Things that happen during infancy have 
     dramatic effects on how that child will develop for the rest 
     of their life. The Internet is no different. It is a 
     technology in its infancy. We are fortunate to live in an 
     exciting time of great technological change. In my State of 
     Montana, cutting-edge technology is creating jobs and 
     industry. But like anything in its infancy, we should be very 
     careful about how we respond to technological infants like 
     the Internet. A wrong step now could affect how it develops 
     for the next 100 years.
  For this reason, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 did not 
identify the Internet as a target of regulation. However, it also did 
not specifically exclude it. When the FEC decided how to enforce the 
regulatory measures of the new law, they erred on the side of caution 
and exempted the Internet from their regulatory scope.
  The fruits of that decision have been profound. According to a Pew 
Internet

[[Page S6096]]

and American Life Project survey, two thirds of adult Americans, or 136 
million citizens, use the Internet. For youth, that number is even 
higher. Over half of the adults who use the Internet used it during the 
2004 campaign cycle. They used it to obtain news and determine 
candidate positions. They viewed websites for campaigns and advocacy 
groups. They looked for information to register to vote. They followed 
opinion polls, looked at jokes, and checked the validity of rumors. 
They emailed one another about the election, and received email 
newsletters from candidates and advocacy groups. By a 10 to 1 margin, 
these Americans said that the Internet was a positive addition to 
public debate in the 2004 campaign. In the past several years, the 
Internet has become a powerful way for the American People to voice 
their opinions on everything from car parts to hair styles to political 
elections.
  The Internet has been utilized by Americans representing the numerous 
ideologies of all the political parties. It is not Republican. It is 
not Democrat. It is not rich or poor. The Internet, like this country, 
is the mixture of all of those things together. It has become the 
newest and most dynamic melting pot of ideas.
  But all this may be threatened because in 2004 a Federal court here 
in Washington, DC, instructed the FEC to begin regulating the Internet. 
The FEC has begun working out the details for this new regulatory 
framework, and right now we can see what that process looks like. I'll 
tell you this. It's not easy to understand. There are experts who don't 
understand it all. There are thousands of pages of comments and 
proposals.
  The Online Freedom of Speech Act can clean up this entire mess with 8 
simple lines of legislation.
  In 1996, I was a co-founder of the Congressional Internet Caucus. 
Today, there are 176 members of this caucus from both parties and in 
both the Senate and the House of Representatives. These members have 
pledged to uphold the following: Promoting growth and advancement of 
the Internet; providing a bicameral, bipartisan forum for Internet 
concerns to be raised; promoting the education of Members of Congress 
and their staffs about the Internet; promoting commerce and the free 
flow of information on the Internet; advancing the United States' world 
leadership in the digital world; and maximizing the openness of and 
participation in government by the people.
  I helped found this caucus because I understand the importance of 
careful treatment of this technology in its infancy. Government tends 
to want to regulate, and regulation can stunt growth. I am very 
concerned that without legislation like the Online Freedom of Speech 
Act, the First Amendment rights of Americans, from Montana and 
throughout the rest of the county, will be severely damaged.
  Experts have warned that at the very least, proposed online 
regulation will subject Internet advocates, like bloggers, to the 
prospect of FEC investigations. That can mean subpoenas, lawyers, 
increased government payrolls and bureaucracy. Such investigations are 
not only a huge commitment for the FEC, but a serious threat to free 
speech online.
  One of the things that makes the Internet unique is that it is so 
broadly accessible. Compared to more traditional forms of publication 
it is very cheap to publish on the Internet. As little as 20 years ago, 
the only way for someone's ideas to reach the full Marketplace of Ideas 
was to secure access to a printing press or broadcast center.
  But as I said, the Internet is much different, now allowing anyone to 
promote his or her ideas into the marketplace. Internet media doesn't 
crowd out other competing media. And since everyone can have their say, 
the reader is the one who gets to decide what he or she wants to read. 
We need to be mindful of allowing the government to try to limit the 
choices of what the consumer can make.
  Mr. President, as you can see, regulatory standards for the Internet 
must be much different than for other forms of public communication. 
The traditional arguments for traditional media do not apply here.
  Some of my colleagues may think that there must be some regulation of 
the Internet for some types of political speech. However, before we 
choose to regulate this infant technology, we need learned-testimony 
and debate on this issue by discussing this bill. We need to make sure 
that regulation is the best course of action. Accordingly, I urge my 
colleagues to join me in support for the Online Freedom of Speech Act.

                          ____________________