Thanks to John Morris of CDT for pointing me to this recent CDT report: Child Safety and Free Speech Issues in the 110th Congress.  [Disclosure:  I am a Policy Fellow with CDT.]

There seems to be a lot of energy, Democratic and Republican, in favor of "doing something" to protect children online.  The CDT memo carefully categorizes proposed legislation, points out that both the COPA Commission and the National Academy independently found that "(A) in light of the global nature of the Internet, criminal laws and other
direct regulations of content inappropriate for minors will be ineffective, and (B) education and
parental empowerment with filtering and other tools are far more effective than any criminal law," and evaluates the constitutionality and likely effectiveness of several proposed bills. 

Forced labeling of sites?  Unconstitutional ("compelled speech") and completely ineffective. 

Preventing kids from viewing blogs and social network sites (DOPA)?  Overreaching, ineffective, and unconstitutional.

Imposing special burdens on blogs and social networks? Very bad for the future (don't undermine Section 230, which has spurred economic growth and innovation). 

Mandated data retention?  Bad for personal privacy, makes intermediaries into private police, unnecessary, and really expensive.

Government blacklists of sites? Horrendous collateral consequences (based on the crude blocking methods available, lots of innocent materials will be blocked), ineffective, and unconstitutional.

(A new entry introduced on Feb. 15 by Sen. Pryor (S. 602) calls for the FCC to create blocking technologies that will "improve or enhance the ability of a parent to protect his or her child from any indecent or objectionable video or audio programming, as determined by such parent, that is transmitted through the use of wire, wireless, or radio communication."  Including online communication.  Whoof.)

The better approach, and the one CDT recommends, is to focus on education and actually prosecute bad guys (rather than just fighting with the internet).

CDT is manifestly correct, and they're doing a great job.  But there are so many proposals, and so many people running for office who want to be seen as "protecting children," that some of these efforts may stick.  And pass.  Any one of these bills if enacted into law would be quite destructive. 

What happened to U.S. leadership in internet policy?  We should be inspiring other governments to work on education and empowerment rather than ineffective and harmful gross blocking/filtering techniques.  Instead, we're wildly proposing legislation without reflecting on the harm it could do to society and to the Constitution.  This is risking our future and that of the global internet.