Return-Path: <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h71Cf6726066; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 08:41:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 08:41:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <20030801.083902.6878.2.sophocles5@juno.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "George E. Demetrion" <sophocles5@juno.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-POVRACELIT:1208] definition of lobbyingColleagues, X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 Status: O Content-Length: 1657 Lines: 35 Colleagues: A while back, there was some discussion about the illegitimacy of utilizing the NIFL airwaves for purposes of lobbying. Unfortunately, the definition and parameters of what lobbying consists of remains vague. As I understand it, the lobbying issue is based on the Hatch Act. I could be wrong about that, and if so, I would like to be corrected. However, as I understand the Hatch Act, it principally prohibits use of federal funds for advocacy related to political elections. I scanned the Hatch Act once, some time ago, and didn't see any reference to advocacy in support or against specific legislation. It may be there and if so, I'd like to be informed. Even if it is not, one might draw a reasonable inference (from a loose rather than tight construction of the law) that such advocacy for or against legislation violates the sprit of the Hatch Act. But even there, unless it is specifically in the Act, that would be an assumption that would need vigorous public discussion than simply assumed. In any event, when one gets to the point of analogizing US foreign policy (and foreign policy is almost always linked to domestic policy, and that is the point), unless I'm reading it wrong, it is a very large stretch to prohibit such discussions based on the mandate against lobbying. Now, perhaps that specific case can be made, but if so, we have not heard it here or claimed as NIFL-based policy. What we have is a general mandate against lobbying, but a very vague definition of what lobbing is and the basis upon which it is prohibited. The mandates of civic literacy require clarification on this matter. George Demetrion
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:18:11 EST