|
|
Proposed
Kentucky Senate Bill 8
* Hearing
in House committee on Tuesday February 18, 2008
All lawful government is based on the "INFORMED" consent of the people.
The people of Kentucky have not given Kentucky lawmakers their consent
to create superior "unrestricted" and inferior "restricted" speech and
press "Rights"!
* Bad Faith: Despite repeated request no
Kentucky newspaper or broadcast station including Kentucky Educational
Television has reported that Senate Bill 8 will
exempt newspaper and broadcasters from election laws that regulate the
speech and press rights of their readers and viewers. Do
newspaper editors, reporters and broadcast talking heads believe they
should be entitled to greater freedom to engage in political speech than
their readers, listeners and viewers? Has the institutional media
"spiked" this news story in order to avoid public debate about their
proposed exemption?
Why would any lawmaker or citizen believe that the for profit use of a
"Free Press" would be less suspicious or corrupting to our political
process than the not for profit use of a "Free Press" by Citizens
pooling their money to buy paper and ink out of political or moral
conviction?
(5) (a) "Contribution" means any:
(b) "Contribution" shall not include:
1. Services provided without compensation by individuals volunteering a
portion or all of their time on behalf of a candidate, a slate of
candidates, committee, referendum committee, or contributing
organization;
2. A loan of money by any financial institution doing business in
Kentucky made in accordance with applicable banking laws and regulations
and in the ordinary course of business;
3. An independent expenditure by any individual or permanent committee;
4. News stories, commentary, or editorials by
the media;
5. Transfers between affiliated party entities that are not
corporations; or
The Kentucky Bill of Rights makes no distinction between the "speech and
press rights" of an individual and the "speech and press Rights" of
newspaper and broadcast businesses. Why does Senate Bill 8 fail to place
the same restrictions and reporting requirements on Kentucky newspaper
"editorial boards" and broadcast businesses "talking heads" that it
places on every other Kentucky resident?
WHY IS THE KENTUCKY BILL OF RIGHTS TREATED LIKE A DEAD LETTER
Defining free speech and free press as "institutional" rather than an
"Individual" right violates the Kentucky Bill of Rights and the First
Amendment because when these Bills of Rights were adopted, the
"institutional interpretation" had not yet been invented and the
"individual rights" view was an accepted part of the contract!
The Kentucky legislature should be concerned that allowing the federal
government to define free speech and free press for Kentucky as it
applies to the election of U.S. Representatives, U.S. Senators and in
Presidential contest violates the Kentucky Constitution because when the
compact for statehood was adopted the federal government agreed that it
would have no authority to regulate religion, speech or the use of a
printing press. * Refer to sources #1, 2 3 below
In any case when the First Amendment was adopted it guaranteed
"Individual Press Rights" it did not guarantee "institutional press
rights". Businesses were not recognized as "legal persons" in the United
States until 1886.
Who has the Authority to change the meaning of words? Constitutions,
Bills of Rights and business contracts become meaningless if the
definition of the words in those agreements are changed after they are
adopted!
For Example:
If senate Bill 8 passes without amendment. A foreign citizen who
purchases or creates a new Kentucky newspaper will be exempt from state
election laws that restrict your constituents enumerated speech and
press rights!
It should be obvious to any member of the Kentucky legislature that our
state and federal "Bill of Rights" did not guarrantee a foreign citizen
or a foreign corporation more rights to influence our political process
than they guaranteed any of your constituents!
The Kentucky Bill of Rights, in very clear and plain language guarantees
every Kentucky resident an equal "Right to Speak" and to "Publish" their
political opinions. Our Bill of Rights, places no caveats on how
individuals raise or pool money to purchase paper and ink or pay for
distribution of printed material. The Kentucky Bill of Rights,
guarantees no preference for the institutional or for profit use of a
printing press in fact it literally recognizes every persons equal
"RIGHT" to use a printing press to report on the workings of the
Kentucky General Assembly and the U.S. Congress, it also guarantees
every Kentucky residents equal "RIGHT" to publish their editorial
opinion!
Why would any lawmaker or
citizen believe that the for profit use of a "Free Press" would be less
suspicious or corrupting to our political process than the not for
profit use of a "Free Press" by Citizens pooling their money to buy
paper and ink out of political or moral conviction?
KENTUCKY BILL OF RIGHTS:
Sec. 1. Rights of life, liberty, worship, pursuit of safety and
happiness, free speech, acquiring and protecting property, peaceable
assembly, redress of grievances, bearing arms.
All men are, by nature, free and equal, and
have certain inherent and inalienable rights,
among which may be reckoned:
Fourth: The right of freely communicating their thoughts and opinions.
Sec. 8. Freedom of speech and of the press. Printing presses shall be
free to every person who undertakes to examine the proceedings of the
General Assembly or any branch of government, and no law shall ever be
made to restrain the right thereof. Every
person may freely and fully speak, write and print on any subject,
being responsible for the abuse of that liberty.
Sec. 26. General powers subordinate to Bill of Rights; laws contrary
thereto are void. To guard against transgression of the high powers
which we have delegated, We Declare that every
thing in this Bill of Rights is excepted out of the general powers of
government, and shall forever remain inviolate; and all laws
contrary thereto, or contrary to this Constitution, shall be void.
Source
#1
Noah Webster, An Examination into the Leading Principles of the
Federal Constitution, October 17, 1787:
[1] It
is alleged that the liberty of the press is not guaranteed by the new
constitution. But this objection is wholly unfounded.
The liberty of the press does not come within
the jurisdiction of federal government. It is firmly established in all
the states either by law, or positive declarations in bills of right;
and not being mentioned in the federal constitution, is not and cannot
be abridged by Congress, it stands on the basis of the respective
state-constitutions. Should any state resign to Congress the
exclusive jurisdiction of a certain district, which should include any
town where presses are already established, it is in the power of the
state to reserve the liberty of the press, or any other fundamental
privilege, and make it an immutable condition of the grant, that such
rights shall never be violated. All objections therefore on this score
are "baseless visions."
Most
state constitutions include an "inviolable clause" forbidding any
amendments or restrictions to the right of conscience, the freedom of
religion, the right to speak, the right to own or hire the use of a
printing press and the right to seek redress for grievances. (RAL)
Source
#2
Excerpts below are from page images 540 and 541 on
Elliot's Debates--KENTUCKY RESOLUTIONS OF 1798 AND 1799.
[THE
ORIGINAL DRAFT PREPARED BY THOMAS JEFFERSON.]
[The
following Resolutions passed the House of Representatives of Kentucky ,
Nov. 10, 1798. On the passage of the 1st Resolution, one dissentient;
2d, 3d, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, two dissentients; 9th, three
dissentients.]
3.
Resolved, That it is true, as a general principle, and is also expressly
declared by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that "the powers
not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited
by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the
people;" and that, no power over the freedom of
religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press, being delegated to
the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
states, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and
were reserved to the states, or to the people; that thus was
manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of
judging how far the licentiousness of speech, and of the press, may be
abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those
abuses which cannot be separated from their use, should be tolerated
rather than the use be destroyed; and thus also they guarded against all
abridgment, by the United States, of the freedom of religious principles
and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the
same, as this, stated by a law passed on the general demand of its
citizens, had already protected them from all human restraint or
interference; and that, in addition to this general principle and
express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by
one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares,
that "Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the
freedom of speech, or of the press," thereby guarding, in the same
sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech,
and of the press, insomuch that whatever violates either throws down the
sanctuary which covers the others,--and that libels, falsehood, and
defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from
the cognizance of federal tribunals. That therefore the act of the
Congress of the United States, passed on the 14th of July, 1798,
entitled "An Act in Addition to the Act entitled 'An Act for the
Punishment of certain Crimes against the United States,'" which does
abridge the freedom of the press, is not law, but is altogether void,
and of no force.
Source
#3
From
CENTINEL, NO. II. Documents from the Continental Congress and the
Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789
To the
People of Pennsylvania.
FRIENDS, COUNTRYMEN, and FELLOW-CITIZENS,
As long as the liberty of the press continues unviolated, and the people
have the right of expressing and publishing their sentiments upon every
public measure, it is next to impossible to enslave a free nation.
The state of society must be very corrupt and base indeed, when the
people in possession of such a monitor as the press, can be induced to
exchange the heaven born blessings of liberty for the galling chains of
despotism. --Men of an aspiring and tyrannical disposition, sensible of
this truth, have ever been inimical to the press, and have considered
the shackling of it, as the first step towards the accomplishment of
their hateful domination, and the entire suppression of all liberty of
public discussion, as necessary to its support. --For even a standing
army, that grand engine of oppression, if it were as numerous as the
abilities of any nation could maintain, would not be equal to the
purposes of despotism over an enlightened people.
|
|
