Russian Meddling Targeted by an American Hero

The nation’s intelligence agencies have conclusively established that Russian-linked operatives bought deceptive online ads in the run-up to the 2016 election.

Congress has long been concerned about foreign spending in our elections, which it sees as a national security issue: In 1996, it banned such spending in congressional amendments to the Foreign Agents Registration Act. But the law hasn’t kept up with technology, creating a loophole that allowed the Russians — who may or may not have been operating at the behest of the Russian government — to purchase ads without detection in 2016.

That’s because since 2006, most online political activity has been exempt from the rigorous regulations to which other media’s political advertising is subject. The Federal Election Commission justified the so-called internet exemption rule by declaring the internet “a unique and evolving mode of mass communication and political speech that is distinct from other media in a manner that warrants a restrained regulatory approach.”

Legal advocates for the tech industry also argued for such exemption to disclosure rules by claiming that ads on the respective platforms were too small to fit disclaimers listing their sponsors.

Last week, Arizona Senator John McCain and two Democratic senators, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mark Warner of Virginia, moved to force internet companies to disclose the identities of those who buy online political advertising, which is not currently required.

The proposed Honest Ads Act aims to force such media to hew to the same restrictions as other electronic and print media. The legislation expands the definition of “electioneering communication” to include online political advertisements. It also requires major internet platforms to maintain a public database of all such communications if more than $500 is spent. And it requires online platforms to make all reasonable efforts to ensure that foreign citizens and powers are not purchasing political advertisements, just as other media are already required to do.

In the weeks leading up to the introduction of the new bill, one communications company told congressional aides that it is too hard to ascertain if an ad is political or commercial because candidates often change messages and topics. The company added that, with the sheer number of ads on the site, the engineering involved in identifying political ads would be extremely challenging.

That’s unfortunate, but foreign attempts to influence American elections are more unfortunate by far. And tech solutions seem to be found for nearly all such problems.

The Honest Ads Act won’t likely eliminate foreign attempts to affect our elections. As a result of the Supreme Court’s 2010 “Citizens United” ruling, American organizations can take unlimited contributions from donors without having to disclose them. Russian interests have demonstrated impressive creativity in wreaking havoc, and will likely explore that and other means of doing their business. But the Honest Ads Act will shut off at least one major avenue for such foreign meddling in American affairs.

While regulations of internet activity is frowned upon by many, the public alarm at Russia’s demonstration of its ability to covertly purchase political ads might just convince Congress to ignore the blandishments of tech industry lawyers and pass the Honest Ads Act, which it should do. It is bipartisan, aimed at enhancing the integrity of our election process, and a fitting feather for the much-decorated hat of John McCain.

The senator is a war hero whose plane was shot down during the Vietnam War, who was tortured by his captors and who refused an out-of-sequence early repatriation offer. In his public service, which began in 1987 and includes two terms in the House of Representatives and six in the Senate, he has repeatedly demonstrated his willingness to rise above partisan politics and speak his conscience freely.

None of that, of course, nor the fact that Mr. McCain is battling glioblastoma, an aggressive brain cancer, is reason for supporting the current legislation he and his co-sponsors have put forward. The proposed law stands as a reasonable and proper bill entirely on the merits of the facts and its aims.

But Mr. McCain’s involvement in helping craft the bill is also a tribute to his dedication to serving his country. A lesser man receiving his medical diagnosis would have simply retired and gone home. But the Arizona senator is pressing on. “I am more energetic and more engaged as a result of this,” he told an interviewer last month, “because I know that I’ve got to do everything I can to serve this country while I can.”

He has indeed served it well, and continues to.