Friday, August 20, 2004

The Big Picture

I forget who was the first person to point this out, but one thing F9/11 did was potentially point the way to a completely unclosable loophole in campaign finance laws. While Conason is right to ask whether this Bossie-Chetwynd production is already in violation of campaign finance rules, my guess the point of this movie isn't the movie, but the ad campaign.

Unlimited funds could be spent advertising for an anti-Kerry movie, even if no one goes to see it...

Conason does raise the issue here, pointing out the hypocrisy:

Ironically, Bossie and Citizens United could find themselves facing the same legal questions they raised about "Fahrenheit 9/11," when they tried to stop TV advertising for the Moore opus. Their complaint to the FEC alleged that such ads constituted prohibited "electioneering communications" against Bush and violated federal restrictions on "soft money." Last month the FEC ruled in favor of the film's distributors because those ads appeared more than four months before the election, during a window when they were permissible.

But the Bossie film will be released within the 120-day pre-election period when such "independent" electioneering communications are prohibited, unless they fall under an exception carved out for commercial media endeavors. Unless "The Big Picture" is billed as a commercial movie intended to earn a profit, it could fall within the category of prohibited electioneering activity. And advertising for the pro-Bush documentary could pose the same questions raised by Citizens United about the promotion of Moore's film.


But, generally, this is one loophole I can't think of any way to close without being an inappropriate restriction on speech.