Pubdate: Thu, 10 Feb 2000
Source: Capital Times, The  (WI)
Copyright: 2000 The Capital Times
Contact:  http://www.thecapitaltimes.com/

LIMITING WEB SPEECH

U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold does not make many missteps in Washington. But he 
tripped up when he signed on as a backer of the constitutionally 
troublesome Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act of 1999.

The bill, as passed by the Senate, empowers law enforcement agencies to 
close sites on the World Wide Web that are viewed by those authorities as 
teaching or demonstrating the manufacture of controlled substances. Some 
critics say the bill might even be read by ambitious authorities to allow 
them to prevent legitimate drug-policy reform groups from establishing 
Internet links to controversial Web sites.

The bill would create "a situation that is ripe for abuse'' by police 
agencies, according to Deborah Pierce of the Electronic Frontier 
Foundation, a group that seeks to maintain free speech on the Internet. 
Because the bill does not include a requirement that authorities get a 
judge's permission to order a Web site shut down, Marv Johnson, legislative 
counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, says it raises serious due 
process concerns.

Since Feingold is one of the Senate's most diligent defenders of free 
speech, it is confusing that he would support such a proposal. It is even 
more confusing that the Middleton Democrat would release a press statement 
identifying himself as "a proud co-sponsor'' of the bill.

In fact, Feingold rightly recognized that the bill was flawed when it was 
presented to the Senate Judiciary Committee, on which he sits. The 
Wisconsinite worked hard to redraw the legislation in order to protect 
free-speech rights on the Internet, successfully inserting language to 
require that evidence of intent by the operator of a Web site to promote 
the manufacture of controlled substances be found before a site can be 
censored.

There's no question that Feingold recognized the threat to free-speech 
rights posed by this piece of the drug-war proposal. And his actions did 
reduce those dangers.

But not enough.

The language of the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act of 1999 is 
riddled with loopholes that overzealous police agencies could use to 
silence or restrict legitimate speech on the Internet. In addition, it 
could be used by federal authorities to prevent sites from teaching about 
growing marijuana for medical uses -- even in states where voters have 
approved the production and use of the drug as a legitimate and beneficial 
treatment for glaucoma and other ailments.

Because of these very serious flaws in the legislation, members of the 
House, including U.S. Rep. Tammy Baldwin, D-Madison, should oppose this 
legislation.

As for Feingold, we respect his legitimate desire to balance a fight 
against drug abuse with a commitment to protecting free speech. He has cast 
more courageous votes in favor of free speech protections than anyone in 
the Congress.

But, on this bill, the senator's honest desire to forge a workable 
compromise has lead him to support a piece of bad legislation.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart