Extending lobbying rules to bloggers would stifle debate

The Internet has replaced the water cooler, the barbershop and the town square as the preferred venue for people to gather and share their views.

Few topics earn as much attention online as politics and legislation. Opinionated bloggers fiercely debate every conceivable subject, and some of these pundits have a respectable following. Forget K Street – blogs are greatly influential in public policy debates.

The proliferation of blogs now has Washington state regulators evaluating whether lobbying regulations should be extended to Internet communications. The Public Disclosure Commission, our state campaign finance agency, is discussing potential guidelines for Internet lobbying. Questions presented by the PDC include:

 • Are Web sites established to provide lobbying information and to encourage others to lobby for or against a particular bill or rule engaged in a reportable activity?

 • Are expenditures related to grass-roots lobbying directed to the public via e-mail reportable?

 • Are lobbying postings and responses on blogs reportable?

 • Are funds provided to “tip jars” (donation links) on lobbying blogs reportable?

The PDC’s mission is to follow the money. The agency reports “who gives, who gets, and how much.” State law mandates detailed regulations for lobbyists: They must register with the PDC, disclose their compensation and file monthly expense reports. Any violation of these rules – even clerical mistakes – can result in financial penalties. A separate set of rules applies to “grassroots lobbying,” which is communication addressed to the general public intended to influence legislation.

As important as the PDC’s mission is, extending lobbying rules to Internet activity raises serious concerns for individuals.

Many folks go online to exercise their democratic rights. They voice their personal opinions, leave comments on news stories, and email their legislators. Companies and non-profit organizations post views about legislation on their Web sites. Individuals act as citizen journalists, investigating stories before the mainstream media pick up an issue.

What’s more, the borderless nature of the Internet makes it very difficult to regulate. If Washington state imposes lobbying rules on blogs, how would that apply to a blogger in Boise or Portland?

The First Amendment guarantees the right to free speech, and the Washington Constitution goes even further: “Every person may freely speak, write and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right.”

While most bloggers are not paid to express their views, some earn a modest income from web advertisements and “tip jars.” Should an ordinary citizen have to register with a state agency simply because he or she is outspoken about a particular issue?

Excessive regulation of online communications could suppress free speech. Many people, faced with the threat of penalties, would choose to go silent, rather than run the risk of getting slapped with a fine for unauthorized lobbying. Chatter on online discussion forums would die down. Ultimately, legitimate public debate would suffer. Such a rule is bound to end up in litigation.

The PDC will meet on Dec. 4 to discuss Internet lobbying. I believe the commission is making an honest effort to grapple with modern communications technology. But any regulation of the Internet should leave intact the individual’s right to free speech.

Michael Reitz is general counsel of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, a free-market policy institute in Olympia.