A Call to Action re Senate Bill S.1

It seems that there might be a simple loophole to get other organizations around the fines. All you'd have to do is set up an organization, completely or mostly funded by the parent organization, that stimulates through "grassroots communication". Then simply designate all its contacts as members. Viola, the organization has joined the ranks of exempt organizations.

Thanks Chuckles for the comment.

While loopholes may be sought in situations like these, they usually end up becoming "Test Cases" in court. Few grassroots organizations have the funding to lawyer-up to fight something like this all the way to the Supreme Court.

Win or lose, the expenses are astronomical (not to mention the fines that have accumulated should the grassroots organization lose). That is one great reason why our efforts prior to the legislation being passed in Congress is so important.

Where can one find a copy of the exact lingo of the provision? It sounds pretty bad, but I'd like to read it for myself. Is there a website that posts this kind of primary source info?

Thanks.

Hi Starspangledblogger. Thanks for posting the question.

You may go straight to the website for Congress, the link being
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/b_three_sections_with_teasers/active_leg_page.htm
for the list of active pieces of legislation.

The site also provides many other resources.

By the way, S.1 Section 220 is the specific part to read (the rest of the proposal is actually pretty good) as it relates to the bill-in-question. Don't let the dry legal language lull you into believing that Section 220 is harmless.

First, Section 220 could be a defacto violation of 501(C)3.

Second, I've just heard that Section 220 has gone down with 7 Democrats joining all the Republicans.

Third, we need an organizaiton with Pro Bono representation to target attempts such as this.

"The right of freely examining public characters and measures, and of free communication among the people thereon . . . has ever been justly deemed the only effectual guardian of every other right."

-- James Madison (Virginia Resolutions, 21
December 1798)

"Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood."

-- John Adams (A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, 1765)

There are several organizations serving as sentries in the courtroom with regard to ACLU-type law suits, and in the hallways of Congress regarding legislative matters.

Some organizations that do Pro Bono type work include The Alliance Defense Fund (www.AllianceDefenceFund.org) and The American Center for Law and Justice (www.aclj.org). Many others with a little less national profile remain very active.

That's great information.

I just read that section. It's more than scary that such insolent, undemocratic drivel could get so far in the process, let alone so close to passing. Although the Senate has rejected it for the time being, it won't be long before Reid et al try this kind of weasley stunt again. I guess this proves that anything less than constant vigilance will surely make liberty a thing of the past.

Thanks Stars... In response to your comment about Section 220 being lifted for now, you might take a look at my next entry on that point: Blog entry titled, "A Third of the Way to Victory" (Jan. 20, 2007). It agrees with your above mentioned sentiments.

Folks this bill is totally wrong, we have a RIGHT to know what or ELECTED offials are doing! WHy do they not want the grassroots to communicate the goings on of Public leaders such as Congress? Is it so they can get away with much more? YES IT IS! We MUST put a stop to this bill!