Utah Valley is a "wired" place. We have a plethora of high-tech companies; broadband networks in Provo, Orem, Lindon and Payson; and two university campuses, one of which (BYU) has been called the "most wired" in America.

That's why our region must be concerned about two bills in Congress that have the potential to make ordinary digital messages felonies, and empower the government to take over the Internet.

First, there's a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives that's now in committee -- a committee upon which 3rd District congressman Jason Chaffetz sits. It's the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act (H. R. 1966), and it aims to keep kids from harassing others. That's a genuine concern. But in its present form it raises questions about how far it could go in suppressing free speech. The key clause:

"Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

Note how broad the language is. It's hard to say, for example, where attempts at persuasion become "coercion," or what "emotional distress" is. This could easily be used to attack First Amendment rights.

If a blog berates a politician, should the blogger go to jail for causing "emotional distress"? Or imagine someone being fined for sending a string of "hostile" e-mails to a company over a faulty product. It's also possible to see how a voter could be imprisoned for e-mails trying to "coerce" a lawmaker to vote a certain way. And what if a teenage guy sends "repeated" text messages to a girl. Could he could be found guilty of felony harassment?

As the representative from Utah Valley, Chaffetz should oppose the bill in its present form.

Meanwhile, in the Senate, a proposed bill raises questions about whether the government could take over the Internet. The measure, S.773, the so-called Cybersecurity Act of 2009, aims to protect the nation's digital infrastructure from attack. That's also a timely concern. But buried in the bill is language that would allow the president to take over -- and shut down -- all or parts of the Internet.

"The term 'Federal Government and United States critical infrastructure information systems and networks' includes ... [s]tate, local, and nongovernmental information systems and networks in the United States designated by the President as critical infrastructure information systems and networks," the bill reads in part. Under this, the president could conceivably designate any major Internet company as a critical information system.

Now comes this: "The President ... may declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network ...[and] may order the disconnection of any Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information systems or networks in the interest of national security."

This measure doesn't define emergency, so the president can call almost anything one. Say there's a report that someone might try to hack into government computers (which happens now, by the way). Then imagine that the president has designated Google, Yahoo, MSN, the major internet service providers and major server farms as critical infrastructure. Bingo. He can take over the Internet.

Utah Valley residents depend on the Internet now. They need to know they can use it without fear -- either of retribution or a presidential shutdown. They need to know that government can't seize the Internet on a pretext.

We call on all Utah members of Congress to make sure neither of these bills makes it through.