Rep. Steve Chabot Criticized By Tea Party Activists For Seizing Cameras From Democrats At Town Halls

WASHINGTON -- After banning and confiscating cameras at his town hall events, Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) is taking heat from all sides -- including from Tea Party activists Eric Odom and Judson Phillips.

At a town hall meeting on Monday, a Chabot staffer directed a Cincinnati police officer to seize video cameras and cell phones from two Democratic activists who were attending the event.

This is the first report of cameras being confiscated at Chabot's town halls, although he has been banning them since at least June.

Chabot spokesman Jamie Schwartz said the policy was meant "to protect the privacy of constituents," saying there were "multiple instances where constituents voiced their concern about being videotaped when asking a question that revealed private information."

Members of the media were also filming at Monday's event, but their cameras were not taken.

The progressive advocacy group Americans United for Change sent out a press release Wednesday about Chabot's event. "At Steve Chabot’s recent Cincinnati town hall, Chabot took an extraordinary step, banning constituents from filming the town hall and asking questions directly," the group wrote. "What didn’t he want people outside the event to see? Perhaps his defense of tax cuts for billionaires and Wall Street corporations."

The controversy has yielded a rare moment of agreement between progressives and Tea Party activists. Odom sharply criticized Chabot in an email to supporters on Thursday, writing, "Just when you think you've seen it all... a story breaks about a Republican Congressman (or his staff) instructing police to confiscate cameras from constituents in the audience of a townhall event! Yep, you read that right, at a public townhall event, in a public venue (high school gym), hosted by a public official and coordinated by public staffers, personal/private cameras and cell phones are now being forcefully removed to keep video footage from hitting YouTube."

He then directed readers to his blog post on the matter, in which he states, "This is a clear violation of rights and Congressman Chabot should be ashamed of himself. His staff should be rebuked, an apology should be given, and the officer should be punished."

Phillips also criticized Chabot Wednesday, writing in a blog post, "Chabot is a moron. First, you cannot confiscate the property of a private citizen without a warrant or some other due process. Second, and I will type this slowly just in case Chabot is reading this so he will understand this. PHOTOGRAPHY IS NOT A CRIME."

Chabot has also been known to restrict the format of his town hall events, requiring participants to sign in when they enter and write out their questions beforehand. Staffers then choose which questions the congressman answers.

In response to the outcry, Schwartz said that at Chabot's next town hall meeting, scheduled for Monday, cameras will not be confiscated and individuals will be able to ask questions directly.

"We will be modifying our policy to allow individual citizens to bring cameras to our town hall events and will be instructing those in attendance that if they have a private question for the Congressman that he will be available to meet with them after the meeting concludes," he said.

WATCH the confrontation at Chabot's town hall (via ThinkProgress):

Comments

[stuckintraffic]

08:48 PM on 08/31/2011

Why would you reveal personal information at a town hall meeting? Amazing how the very same people that proclaim to be strict Constitionalist ignore the Constitution when it's convenient.

[veteran1964]

05:41 PM on 08/29/2011

Hey Chabot....READ THIS.......From a source:

Remember the confiscation of cameras and recording devices at Steve Chabot's town hall meeting in Ohio a few weeks ago? Well, a Federal Court has ruled that the confiscation violated First Amendment rights, and that people are allowed to film or record public officials while performing their duties in public, ie Republicans who hold public meetings.

From the court ruling:

"the filming of government officials engaged in their duties in a public place, including police officers performing their responsibilities, fits comfortably within these principles. Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting “the free discussion of governmental affairs.” Mills v. Alabama, 384 U.S. 214, 218 (1966)."

"The court found that people have the First Amendment right to film government officials in public while they are carrying out their duties. In fact, this right is necessary in our democracy to counteract attempts by those who have power to suppress the rights of citizens. The act of not allowing the public to film the carrying out of congressional duties in public is an act of First Amendment suppression.

These same members of the House who prided themselves on their knowledge of the Constitution, and made a show of beginning the new Congress with a reading of the Constitution is so willing to violate the First Amendment rights of their constituents.

[jedwightn]

05:04 PM on 08/29/2011

Republicans prefer to operate in secrecy. Dick Cheney's energy policy formulation in the dark with energy company representatives is a shining example. Because of it, we've been fracked.

[SOSTED]

07:27 PM on 08/29/2011

Yea, Like Mr and Ms Transparency themselves,,,,,,We have to pass the bill in order to find out what's in it???? Obamacare???

[newleaf]

01:09 AM on 08/30/2011

Geez, it was online ahead of time for weeks! Got an aversion to reading?

[pategp]

04:25 PM on 09/01/2011

What planet have you been living on? That's been debunked so many times even the debunking is getting old. You might want to rejoin the USA in September of 2011 with the rest of us.

[Species5618]

03:43 PM on 08/29/2011

It's amazing that they aren't afraid to show their true colors. They'd rather sneak into public office without revealing what their true agenda is. The fact that they are completely un-American while trying to convince everyone they're fighting for America and people are buying it is beyond sad.

[bola47]

02:55 PM on 08/29/2011

revealing private information at a public town hall meeting? huh?

[So silly]

01:26 PM on 08/29/2011

You know you have problems when you have to issue a statement saying you will not confiscate people's cameras at a public town hall.

[johnpw41042]

01:38 PM on 08/29/2011

Yes, it is really a town hall meeting Republican style. Where all the questions are censored and scripted, the attendees are censored and chosen, and personal items are taken away. They want good little "automatons" attending these meetings without disruptions. If the citizens of the United States want to have politicians like this in government who take away your civil rights, then by all means keep on electiing them.

[vietveter]

02:14 PM on 08/29/2011

If this guy is worthy of your vote,

you will get what you deserve.

fanned

[Gailsunday]

04:11 PM on 08/29/2011

"automatons" great choice of words, they is EXACTLY what the top 400 richest people in the world want us, (they started this "plan" end of WWII, the engineering of society, and they are right on target)the regular American, the 98% to be...to do their bidding, fight their wars which they create to boost the economy and manipulate us, fall into line, don't think critically, remain in ignorance ( by choice or incapacity), of their plans for the world they intend to design to fit themselves, when they have ALL the money, then WE become their fieldom.

[Master-T]

12:34 PM on 08/29/2011

Chabot spokesman Jamie Schwartz said the policy was meant "to protect the privacy of constituents".

Classic Republicanism. We're restricting your freedom to protect you. And loony conservatives think the GOP is the party of freedom. What a joke.

[celmak]

12:42 PM on 08/29/2011

Yeppers, its a good idea; think I'll start videoing the particapents of these Democratic events myself (I know I can get something newsworthy there!).

[Preshie]

05:01 PM on 08/29/2011

If a Democrat does something like this, I want to know about it! I won't defend someone from such egregious behavior just because he is a member of 'my' political party -- and therein lies the difference between the constituents of the two parties.

[MtnGeek]

03:41 PM on 08/29/2011

The is no perceived privacy in a public meeting. Aren't these people supposed to understand the laws before they are allowed to go out and write them?

[bi-poplar]

12:16 PM on 08/29/2011

And from somewhere in the pits of Hell, Joe McCarthy looked up and smiled

[ASherbuck]

11:21 AM on 08/29/2011

Blatant theft.

[hazlnut]

10:57 AM on 08/29/2011

Why do people like Palin and this clown hate videotape... because the tape don't lie.

[exhale09]

10:40 AM on 08/29/2011

and the "Policeman" had no problem infringing on the rights of this CITIZEN? The "Policeman" was taking his "orders" from WHO?

That's just as demented as Rep. Chabot's beliefs that "he" can stifle American Citizen's freedom at a PUBLIC Town Hall meeting...actually, it's an alarming indication of the power Republicans are usurping from We The People.

[johnpw41042]

01:42 PM on 08/29/2011

That policeman should of known the law better, I agree. But, on the other hand, that policeman was probably off duty and was earning extra money as a "rent a cop". Maybe, he was under the impression that he was at a "Private Republican Town Hall Meeting" and he did not want to have any of the nasty rabble rousing Democrats causing disruptions trying to get some truth in those meetings.

[MtnGeek]

03:42 PM on 08/29/2011

He should have been aware that he was personally liable for any damages he caused while "moon lighting" as security. Then maybe he would have upheld the law instead of acting as another GOP stooge.

[pategp]

05:40 PM on 09/01/2011

This was most unfortunate, but the reality is that it's starting to happen all over the country. In my city you cannot bring cell phones with a camera into the District Court building. I was told this by one of the security guards there and signs saying that are posted on the walls. I have read (but not verified) a story where I woman was arrested by police for standing in her OWN yard and taping them when they were confronting someone else on the street.

[wheelzroller]

10:38 AM on 08/29/2011

I think that this is about the Representative not wanting to have anything recorded or on video
that perhaps he could not control, so his words would not come back to haunt him or God forbid
end up going virale on Youtube. First they came for the Books, then they came for the Cameras',
then they came for ........

[DUSAA-1775]

10:43 AM on 08/29/2011

You might be correct. except for the fact that media was there and taping...

[joeyfoto]

09:11 AM on 08/29/2011

This is proof that this man is unfit to serve in elected office in any democracy.
Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH), who in the hell do you think you are?

If the voters in this man's district return him to congress, they are sheep,
who deserve whatever failure or disgrace he brings upon them.

[exhale09]

12:28 PM on 08/29/2011

Mr. Chabot doesn't like the notion of "being held accountable to truth" for his words.

I'm surprised Chabot didn't insist the Constitution doesn't say ANYTHING about the Right to Bare Cameras, so his actions were perfectly acceptable under the LAW.
You know how selectively those "strict Constructionists" interpret the Law.

Conservative's apparently have decided, in their odd "STRICT CONSTRUCTIONIST" kind of way, that "The Right to FREE SPEECH" includes the right to LIE, cause after all, LYING is SPEECH too, strictly speaking...and Conservative's have made LYING their most important political tool.

so since money=free speech too... and it's used effectively to suppress those "who don't have any "MONEY"... that's fine according to the Conservative Supreme Court's recent "strict constructionist" (what a joke) Constitutional interpretation and decision, that "Corporations are People too"...

Those with the most "Money is Speech" (which includes LIES) which are the "Corporations are People"...

they get to buy the most/majority, power/influence in/over Government...because whoever has the MOST money= the MAJORITY by definition, since "Corporations are People... and Money = Free Speech" which buys them the most power.

Our Constitution says the Government of America represents the "People"

So if Corporations ARE People too, and money= Free speech, saith the Supreme Court,

"holding our politicians accountable to truth" is ACTUALLY infringing on the Free Speech Right of "Corporations Are People" to LIE.

Hence, no cameras allowed at town hall meetings.

See how it works?!

[Elisabeth Montgomery]

07:28 AM on 08/29/2011

This is why we all need cameras at all the town hall meetings. When Bush W campaigned and later made public appearances it was always off-limits for Democrats and otherwise disaffected. Chabot, a lame Republican wearing loose Tea Bags, manifests the same notion to make some of the people happy, but not be fair to all, especially if they hold other views. If people do not want to be filmed at public events like Town Halls then they probably should not attend them. The world is on film now, like it or not, its a price of our freedom.

[Mij13]

03:50 AM on 08/29/2011

Isn't that Ken Mehlman standing behind Chabot in the photo? What's he doing there?

[lackeylocal]

05:49 AM on 08/29/2011

If not, it's his body double.Strange they w/b teaming up or is it?

[johnpw41042]

01:44 PM on 08/29/2011

Who is Ken Mehlman and what significance does him being there mean?