I don't want my speech regulated...

...but I'm not sure how best to avoid it. There's been a ruckus over the "Online Coalition" lately, which is a list of bloggers signing against regulation of the blogosphere. Basically this regulation idea is a tack-on to the ridiculous Campaign Finance Reform bill that (disgustingly) had bipartisan and presidential support. There are two sides to this debate among the blogosphere. Obviously, nobody wants to regulate free speech; rather, the discussion involves how to achieve this freedom--effectively or technically. There are some who would seek to rid the system of all political speech regulation and let the people decide what to believe and trust, not some unlected FEC regulator. Commenter ras puts it best:

With full disclosure of who’s financing a candidate or movement, the voters can regulate what they want, for themselves, directly at the ballot box, rather than having unelected bureaucrats making that decision for them.

Go for disclosure, not regulation. Never regulation. Disclosure is more tenable, desirable, and consistent. It also makes a saleable summation to present to the voters: “disclosure, not suppression.”

The other view is to get special regulatory exemptions for bloggers, similar to the ones granted to journalists and editorialists. This view sees the McCain-Feingold regulation as not likely to be overturned any time soon, so we might as well get the best we can right now and protect bloggers. Jeff Harrell of Shape of Days disagrees.

See, I don't think of myself as a blogger. I think of myself as a freelancer and a writer and a really fun guy to hang around with who just happens to have his own Web site. There's nothing special about me that qualifies me to be a blogger. I didn't pass a test, or fill out a form, or earn the distinction through some kind of heroic deed on the battlefield. I just started doing it. I'm not a member of a protected class. I'm not anybody special. I'm just this guy.

Later on in the discussion, he writes:

Why effectively nullify regulation of personal speech when we can lobby for the actual nullification of personal speech? Second, it raises the possibility of deciding that NOT everybody is a blogger, and that's not something I'm eager to see happen. Obviously.

He and others who share his view argue that we can overturn the unconstitutional Campaign Finance Reform bill if we a) get popular support and b) rid our courts of activists judges.

I'm unsure where I stand on this...I definitely prefer no regulation of political speech whatsoever--that this kind of speech is protected by the 1st Ammendment is so ridiculously obvious, and it's beyond me how McCain can justify his bill. Yet I wonder two things: how in jeopardy are we bloggers? Are we on the brink of being silenced? Do we have enough time to even attempt a reversal of an unconstitutional bill? Or should we pick the battle we're most likely to win?