"For the people act" - The bottom line?

• American citizens could no longer talk about politics without possibly being in violation of the law: H.R. 1 looks to regulate any speech that: promotes or supports the candidate, or ­attacks or opposes an opponent of the candidate
• The law would also seek to regulate any communications that:“refers to a candidate or an opponent to a candidate 120 days before an election or 60 days before a primary or a caucus.”
• The law would seek to redefine and regulate any political position, by redefining as a lobbyist anyone who engages in: “legislative, political, and strategic counseling services”
• The law would require complete disclosure of information about any donations (whether they even are politically driven) to any group or organization that the FEC determines has any political messages. So a donor could be "exposed" to people who don't like a particular message that organization might support (or even a subsidiary) - leading to public bullying and harassment. 
• The law would strip states of their ability (as the constitution demands) to control their own election laws. It would remove their ability to draw congressional districts, control their own voter rolls, as well as some other more mundane restrictions that gives specific control over to the Federal government. 
• The law would create the equivalent of Government funded campaigns, as Government funding would make most small donations irrelevant.
• Instead of a six person commission that requires a three/three split in partisanship and at least four votes to move ahead (requiring bi-partisanship). The new law would create a five person commission, which would effectively assure that another piece of our Government is guaranteed to become "partisan". 

It's unusual that the ACLU is at odds with the Democratic Party, but even they are against this bill. There is nothing "for the people" in this act. It's a power grab, that seeks to put "more" power in the Federal Government and makes sure that this power can be partisan, while stripping power from both the States and the individuals.

It stands no chance of being passed and signed into law, and for good reason.

I am curious...  Is anyone else sick of horrible laws that primarily do the very opposite of what the "name" of the law implies?