Slashdot Mirror
Domain: opensecrets.org
Stories and comments across the archive that link to opensecrets.org.
Comments · 2,126
-
Re:Foreign competitorsI agree 100%. I am born and raised in good ole USA, serverd in the USMC and I am not anti-USA. Though I do hope that we get our butts kicked in the IT world by the EU, China and India. Not because I want to lose my job as a programmer of see others lose thier jobs. It is because our Patent system is very broken, and our big businesses are getting far to much political power that a corporation should _never_ have.
The repair will require a lot more than a democrat in office, too.
Democrats wont' help, they are just as bad as Republicans. Republicans want big business and Dems want big special interest groups such as unions. Look at these "donations" from the Teamsters Union almost all the money is going to Democrats. Contrast that with big business and almost all the "donations" are going to Republicans. The majority of the top 10 "donars" are giving the majority of thier "donations" to Democrats. We need the USA to get closer to a true democracy with more then two political parties to pick from. It is pretty insane to think that all 300+ million Americans fall into one of two political "buckets". And we also need to make it illegal for a corporation to give bribe money. If you cannot vote, you should not be able to make bribes^H^H^H^H^H^Hcampaign contributions.Look at the top 100 "donators" for the period 1998-2004. Just the top 100 have bribed our politicians with $1,156,273,938! You can see why in our "represented" democracy, the average American is not represented. With billions USD going around in bribes, it is hard for even legit politicans to do thier jobs.
-
Re:Pray that we get more Congressmen like Rep Bouc
...DMCA originator Orrin Hatch [] so far this year has taken over $157,000 from the TV/Music/Movies industry
And that's when it starts to get really wierd. Guess who contributed $4500 to Mr. Boucher? -
Re:Pray that we get more Congressmen like Rep Bouc
...DMCA originator Orrin Hatch [] so far this year has taken over $157,000 from the TV/Music/Movies industry
And that's when it starts to get really wierd. Guess who contributed $4500 to Mr. Boucher? -
Look at the contributionsBased apon this, the computer industry (which could benefit greatly if they could make set-top boxs that could copy all dvds) gives twice as much to Rick Boucher then media companies do. This is obviously the way to win, have more politicians in the industies pocket.
Too bad the media companies figured this out 30 years ago!
-
From the link
NOTE: All the numbers on this page are for the 1999-2004 Senate election cycle and based on Federal Election Commission data released electronically on Monday, March 29, 2004.
I believe that number ($157,000) is based on the entire 1999-2004 cycle. This page shows that he has only received $932,737 in contributions this year, which doesn't agree with the number on the pages you cited at all. -
Pray that we get more Congressmen like Rep Boucher
He is one of the few members of Congress who actually gets it. He consistently comes up with workable solutions for the consumer.
Maybe it's because he's not a well paid off lapdog like DMCA originator Orrin Hatch who so far this year has taken over $157,000 from the TV/Music/Movies industry (It's only May for crying out loud!)
Insert Jack Valenti "Boston Strangler" reference here. -
Insurance subsidies
After 911 there were huge assumptions of liability on the part of government for what had been up to that point private insurance. Now, conincidentally, the community that is getting the largest subsidies here is the same community that bankrolled Israel.
-
Also useful...
...opensecrets.org, a good website that lets you know who's holding the leash on your favorite politician.
-
Why this won't become another Martha Stewart case
-
Why this won't become another Martha Stewart case
-
Idiots, all
I am 99.999% sure that pretty much everyone on this board is writing their posts on an Intel- or AMD-based machine (save a few Transmeta loners.) Both of whom are guilty guilty guilty of this so-called outsourcing treason. Not only did you all hypocritically vote with your dollar for said practices, but you didn't even pay the full damn dollar: you all benefitted from cheaper microprocessor costs that are the direct result of Intel and AMD exploiting foreign comparative advantage in chip design. Or Microsoft, in software design. Or Dell, in tech support services. The list goes on.
Sure, you can vote with your ballot for one or the other guy, but something (maybe the millions of dollars of tech-industry money between them) tells me that won't have much of an impact. What's really needed is to withold your $$ from companies that don't engage in these practices. I happen to think there aren't any, but who knows... mebbeso. -
education, not legislation
The Internet functions like a jungle full of ninjas. If an unsuspecting user walks through there and gets assaulted by a ninja, her complaint might be "But that's illegal!" right before her head is separated from her body. In order to catch a ninja, you have to be a ninja -- you have to swing through the trees with the greatest of ease and slice his head off. To survive without being a ninja, you put on a massive suit of armor so that it's harder to slice your head off. It can still happen, though, so you need to know how to use your armor.
I'm being overly dramatic and overly metaphorical, so I'll make it simple:
You CANNOT stop spam, viruses, worms, phreaks, spyware, hacks, cracks, modchips, reverse engineering, social engineering, or DOS attacks by making them illegal. I'm not saying that all of them should be legal, just that our tax dollars should not go to writing laws about them.
You can ONLY stop these things by educating people on how to not get hurt by them. Because they are all a confidence game on the user's computer, and on the user themself, they can all be prevented, but only by intelligent users.
Our tax dollars should go to educating people about how to not get hit by these things. Every school should be given funds to educate children in such things as programming/scripting (the basics of which go hand-in-hand with what they're learning in math), security, the basics of how to generally use software (like how to use any email client, not just Outlook Express or Hotmail) as well as things like open source/Linux (teaches them something they can take home without begging mommy and daddy to spend $20-$200 on a new piece of software)...
Even outside of schools, people should know that you don't just go download some new piece of software just because it looks cool and some friend told you about it. You go online and look it up, find out how many people are using it and what they think of it, whether the company that made it is trustworthy, whether there's an open source alternative, and so on. If you still want to try it and it doesn't look trustworthy, you run it in an untrusted user account, throwaway wine setup, chrooted environment, usermode linux, or throwaway computer.
People should know what a web browser / email client is and why you need to use one that is standards-compliant and secure. They should know how to set up sandboxes to play with potentially unsafe stuff. They should know how to use PGP, or at least why they care. They should know that it doesn't matter who they are or how unimportant their stuff is, someone wants to break into their computer, especially if it's easy.
What's more, We have the money. We just have to spend it on the right things. -
Re:I think Diebold needs special treatment
They have a record of donating to both parties. Let's not get into this so very tired "donating to the Republicans" bullshit.
According to opensecrets.org, $39,690 was donated by Diebold employees for the 2002 and 2204 election cycles, of which $2500 was to democrats, $1500 to PACs and the rest to republicans (mainly Bush and Voinovich). This is not a good record of donating to both parties.
Of course, any amount to either party is too much --- anyone working in this area should not have even a hint of partisanship! -
Re:I think Diebold needs special treatment
Well, according to opensecrets.org, for the 2002 and 2000 election cycles, it doesn't look like too much went to the Democratic party. Diebold could have been donating heavily to the democratic party and I still would be pissed because they are biased (not to mention secretive) and in control of the voting process in many places.
Anyways...
Where did you see records of them donating to the democratic party? -
Re:I think Diebold needs special treatment
Well, according to opensecrets.org, for the 2002 and 2000 election cycles, it doesn't look like too much went to the Democratic party. Diebold could have been donating heavily to the democratic party and I still would be pissed because they are biased (not to mention secretive) and in control of the voting process in many places.
Anyways...
Where did you see records of them donating to the democratic party? -
Re:I think Diebold needs special treatment
Well, according to opensecrets.org, for the 2002 and 2000 election cycles, it doesn't look like too much went to the Democratic party. Diebold could have been donating heavily to the democratic party and I still would be pissed because they are biased (not to mention secretive) and in control of the voting process in many places.
Anyways...
Where did you see records of them donating to the democratic party? -
Generous Bill
Bill Gates also respects the work of many politicians as well
-
Re:Python..
What would be nice is a lever for all incumbents, and all challengers. Well, mainly just all challengers. That way, if you're just generally pissed about the state of your government, you can easily register that thought
-
Re:Old media get a free pass as well...
I've also heard this canard about the "left-wing media" for twenty years. Apart from NPR and PBS, what left-wing media has the US had?
What would be an objective way of going about figuring out exactly what kind of natural biases the mainstream media has? How about an opinion poll of reporters, anchors, publishers, and news management? - every poll ever done reveals that newsrooms are overwhelmingly liberal. Ahh... But their corporate masters set the party line and all those otherwise liberal reporters, anchors etc. dutifully toe the line? Let's look at the political giving of those "conservative" corporations. Hmm... the corporate masters don't seem to be providing much balance.
This is not to say that a bunch of liberal reporters working for corporations dominated, managed and usually owned by liberals don't TRY to be objective. Nor that they don't follow stories that hurt Democrats politically when it is "juicy" (or on occasion even because it is in fact newsworthy). It certainly isn't to say that they intentionally spin the news for partisan advantage. BUT it is natural to perceive people that you agree with as reasonable and well informed and to see people you disagree with as unreasonable, ignorant or even evil. This comes across whenever you watch the evening news or read the major daily papers.
I agree that cable and talk radio are conservative and usually in a much more self-conscious and transparent way. But that conservative voice is so successful because approximately half the population was in a continual state of aggravation when they watched or read the traditional media. Dan Rather, Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw are only slightly less irritating to conservatives as Tony Snow is to liberals. Actually I think the unexamined assumption that "that's the way it is" without any consciousness that many would disagree is actually MORE irritating - Tony Snow KNOWS he is a conservative, he KNOWS at least half the people disagree with him - Dan Rather thinks of himself as the soul of objectivity. -
Re:Now it is all starting to make some sense ...Clear Channel doesn't hold any political views at all that don't directly concern its business.
Oh really?! And you know this how?
Open Secrets tells us that CC gave $209,000 to republicans in 2000-2001.
They have pulled ads criticizing Republicans.
You may remember this:
After Sept. 11, to the amusement/horror of music critics and radio industry professionals, Clear Channel issued a list of 150 songs to its member stations that it deemed too sensitive to play in the wake of the terrorist attacks. The list included an odd mix of songs: the more understandable choices featured flight references ("Bennie and the Jets," "Ticket to Ride"); others were associated with New York ("On Broadway"); and, most surprisingly, many were related to peace ("Bridge Over Troubled Water," "Imagine"). The list also included all songs by the political rock group Rage Against the Machine.
According to this USA Today story:
They have given $42,200 to Bush, vs. $1,750 to likely Democratic nominee John Kerry in the 2004 race. What's more, the executives and Clear Channel's political action committee gave 77% of their $334,501 in federal contributions to Republicans. That's a bigger share than any other entertainment company, says the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics. In contrast, Viacom (VIA) executives and its political action committee gave just 30% of their $545,650 to Republican candidates. Viacom syndicates Stern's show.
Then there's CC executive Tom Hick's previous history of business relationships with George Bush going back to the late 80s.
So let's review-- cushy previous relationship with the Bushes, biased pro-Bush stand on foreign policy, conservative values pushed on their listeners, massive donations to Republican causes, refusal to run anti-Republican advertising...No, I don't see anything political there. Just good business sense. (Yeah, right.)
W -
The differenceOutsourcing and predatory immigration policies like H-1b have their roots in corporate welfare. Even pro-business, pro-immigration economists like Nobel prize winner Milton Friedman call the 1998-2000 expansion of H-1b a "subsidy". I well know the experience of having my congressman, Brian Baird, supported my having an extended period of unemployment on a basis of principle-he has been a strong supporter of H-1b--even though his district has some of the worse unemployment in the nation(hint: Microsoft-a company not in his district is his biggest financial supporter).
The original constitutional reason for copyrights and patents was to support "THE PROGRESS OF SCIENCE AND USEFUL ARTS"--not to protect the creation of what the great Ralph Nader calls "violent corporate sponsored pornography".
I don't opposed government subsidies of "science and the useful arts"--if done on a basis that is fair and democratic --promoting technological development that creates the kind of advancements and culture much of the population wants. What Hollywood wants goes beyond free speech, or subsized technical advancements, Hollywood wants active government support of privately owned, corporate managed social control mechanisms. Given the fact that since protection of these mechanisms has intensified the last 40 years, we've seen a signficant drop in things like disposable income, and an increase in economic inequality, IMHO it is high time we use what political rights we have left and seriously look for alternatives here. -
Re:It's illegal-questionAre you aware of any cases in which there has been successful legal action against an H-1b employer on those grounds? I've seen things like approval of H-1b visas at a rate below minimum wage laws(this was done by an anti-H-1b activist to show how poorly the screening for applications was being done).
My own sense here: neither the spirit nor the letter of the law matter in this case. The expansion of H-1b over the objections of 82% of the American public is just what happens when a country allows things like political donations to play such a huge role in government-rule of law ceases to exist. -
Re:The Porn Industry Isn't Going To Just Take It..
Dude, you need to start making campaign contributions. Seriously, they are only going after your industry because they think there won't be repercussions to their bottom-line. Buy a congressman or two, they are surprisingly affordable.
PS, this is not a joke. Freedom is not free, you gotta pay your toll if you want to keep it. -
This is a hard one
On the one hand, I can understand the privacy implications. On the other hand, full and open disclosure of who gives how much to what politician is universally regarded to be a Good Thing. Anyone who doubts this needs only to look at situations like Orrin Hatch sponsoring the monstrosities he is while receiving $14,750 from Viacom.
-
Um...
wrong.. [opensecrets.org]
-
Fundrace.com already slashdotted
...but you can read all about it here.
According to the article Opensecrets.org provides a similar service...
Anybody who says the Internet "hasn't changed politics" (re: ex-candidate Dean)...well, I'd point to this a solid real-life example that it has. -
Fundrace.com already slashdotted
...but you can read all about it here.
According to the article Opensecrets.org provides a similar service...
Anybody who says the Internet "hasn't changed politics" (re: ex-candidate Dean)...well, I'd point to this a solid real-life example that it has. -
Re:Let's see...
According to opensecrets.org Microsoft greases both parties (which is no surprise most corporations do) although, they gave a significant amount more to republicans. Also not the least bit surprising considering "[the Microsoft break-up] judgment was reversed in 2001 after the Clinton administration, which had adopted an aggressive antitrust stance, was replaced by a more business-friendly Bush administration" (Can Microsoft be tamed?).
-
This is great
It's alot like www.opensecrets.org. I really think that anything involving the government should be as open as possibile, including figuring out where politicians get their money. I want to know if there is any possibility for a candidate to be influenced by his big donors (cough, cough, bush).
This is a GOOD thing. We should know who's donating to what political party, if only to keep people (and money) in check with power. -
Re:Currently writing my theisis with OO.org
And I agree 100% with that line of thought. However, you are breaking MS's EULA and they can certainly take you to court over it and cost you tons of cash in legal fees. I doubt they would do this for your average Joe user, though corporate users need to watch out.
Oh, and with Microsoft being the top donation machine to congress, they do nondirectly set laws. In fact, MS gives about 3 times what the #2 company give to the government. -
Re:Excuse me while I smash my head into the wall.
He already has the license to play the music right? So why does he have to keep paying full price?
Because he is buying a 2nd copy of the album, even if on an entirely different medium. You're not upgrading to a new version of the same product, even if this CD version is (arguably) better. Besides, technically he is not licensed to listen to the album, he's license to consume the contents contained on a particular medium. I'm licensed to listen to The Dark Side of the Moon as provided on the Pulse live album; however I am not license to listen to the same set of music as provided on the original album since I don't own it. Legal hairsplitting sucks.
If he had his receipt and original and went to RCA (I assume that's the producer, I'm sure I'm wrong) and demanded a CD, he'd be laughed the hell out of there.
Yes. RCA would easily argue it has put additional production value in the creation of the CD release, especially if we're talking about a digital remaster. Though it's the same album, it's not the same product. Does the vinyl and CD releases even share the same RCA catalog number?
But the record industry wants to stop you from selling the album to someone else, or even making copies of it
How? Why? Every year I gather my unwanted albums - usually remnants of dumb impulse buys, and I unload those albums on small independent stores like Disc-O'Round. They have no problems buying the albums and reselling them. They even buy albums that I got through BMG. As for making copies, you're right on. RIAA doesn't want you making legitimate backups or even remixes for your own consumption. Technically, I shouldn't be playing my music too loudly that my neighbors can unfairly and illegally consume music which they did not pay for. Eh, Fuck em if they can't take a joke!
You're right, it is they who should be adapting to change rather than forcing the law to bend to their own wants, but that's the way it is. The RIAA gives a lot of money to Congress through the combination of indivual donations and PAC money. The original story mentions Orin Hatch. Looking up the contributions he received in the 2004 election cycle, he's actually more of a whore for lawyers and pharmaceuticals than anything else.
Orrin G. Hatch: 2004 Politican Profile -
Coincidence?
Hmm.. let's see:
Top Industries
The top industries supporting Patrick Leahy are:
1 Lawyers/Law Firms $320,845
2 TV/Movies/Music $178,000
3 Lobbyists $143,262
Just a coincidence, right? -
More detailsLet me give you some more figures:
TV/Movies/Music:
Ranked #7 overall of the industries contributing to the 2002 election cycle with a grand total of $39,902,175. 78% went to Democrats, 22% to Republicans.You can view TV/Movies/Music's contribution history here.
Who are the top contributor's in TV/Movies/Music? You can find that out here. The top 6 contributors and their funds for the 2002 election cycle are:
Saban Capital Group $9,333,000
Shangri-La Entertainment $6,731,000
Viacom Inc $2,016,891
AOL Time Warner $1,502,806
Walt Disney Co $1,212,364
Vivendi Universal $1,184,249
See anybody we know?
-
More detailsLet me give you some more figures:
TV/Movies/Music:
Ranked #7 overall of the industries contributing to the 2002 election cycle with a grand total of $39,902,175. 78% went to Democrats, 22% to Republicans.You can view TV/Movies/Music's contribution history here.
Who are the top contributor's in TV/Movies/Music? You can find that out here. The top 6 contributors and their funds for the 2002 election cycle are:
Saban Capital Group $9,333,000
Shangri-La Entertainment $6,731,000
Viacom Inc $2,016,891
AOL Time Warner $1,502,806
Walt Disney Co $1,212,364
Vivendi Universal $1,184,249
See anybody we know?
-
More detailsLet me give you some more figures:
TV/Movies/Music:
Ranked #7 overall of the industries contributing to the 2002 election cycle with a grand total of $39,902,175. 78% went to Democrats, 22% to Republicans.You can view TV/Movies/Music's contribution history here.
Who are the top contributor's in TV/Movies/Music? You can find that out here. The top 6 contributors and their funds for the 2002 election cycle are:
Saban Capital Group $9,333,000
Shangri-La Entertainment $6,731,000
Viacom Inc $2,016,891
AOL Time Warner $1,502,806
Walt Disney Co $1,212,364
Vivendi Universal $1,184,249
See anybody we know?
-
Hatch's and Leahy's $$For those that are interested...
Orrin Hatch: TV/Movies/Music $152,360
Patrick Leahy: TV/Movies/Music $178,000
-
Hatch's and Leahy's $$For those that are interested...
Orrin Hatch: TV/Movies/Music $152,360
Patrick Leahy: TV/Movies/Music $178,000
-
Re:Senator Patty Murray is deeply troubled
This should really surprise anyone. She's #8 on the MS political contributions list. In fact, 7 of the top 8 are from Washington. But in at #2 is everyones friend, Dubya.
-
Re:Senator Patty Murray is deeply troubled
-
Re:Senator Patty Murray is deeply troubled
-
Re:Senator Patty Murray is deeply troubled
-
Re:Senator Patty Murray is deeply troubled
-
Follow the money
Hardly surprising, giving R. Hewitt Pate was one of the men who imposed MS's wristslap by the DoJ. I wonder if there might be a conflict of interest here.
Note : Allowing your senior DoJ / government lawyers *cough, Ashcroft* to be in hock to major corporations might not be a very wise idea. -
Re:Outsourcing threat is still overblown...
The decline of US IT is serious. US job growth isn't even keeping up with immigration. There has been substantial skills based immigration in IT even with declining overall employment-this was supported by huge political donations.
-
Re:US Government not happy?I agree with Ms. Murray on this.
How dare the EU declare war on and infringe the human rights of a lovely corporation like MS who just happens to have made substantial contributions to Ms. Murray's campaign fund. (~$200000).
-
Re:US Government not happy?I agree with Ms. Murray on this.
How dare the EU declare war on and infringe the human rights of a lovely corporation like MS who just happens to have made substantial contributions to Ms. Murray's campaign fund. (~$200000).
-
Re:US Government not happy?I agree with Ms. Murray on this.
How dare the EU declare war on and infringe the human rights of a lovely corporation like MS who just happens to have made substantial contributions to Ms. Murray's campaign fund. (~$200000).
-
Re:US Government not happy?I agree with Ms. Murray on this.
How dare the EU declare war on and infringe the human rights of a lovely corporation like MS who just happens to have made substantial contributions to Ms. Murray's campaign fund. (~$200000).
-
Troll -1 :)
"Steve Balmer commented, that the fine imposed by the EU is completely unreasonble, considering that you can buy a president in the US with much less.".
-
Great Depression == UnhappinessBorrowing text from a private communique of a colleague:
Reagan's economics advisor Paul Craig Roberts estimates the decrease of software development/design jobs in the US the last 3 years at about 17%.
During this same period, substantial numbers of aliens were "subsidized"(in the words of Nobel prize winner Milton Friedman) to take American jobs in software development and design via the H-1b/L-1 "temporary" worker programs and various immigration programs. There were something like 600,000 corporate sponsored H-1b visas alone issued-about 50% of which were in the computer industry and about half of which might fit the category Mr. Roberts is talking about-that doesn't include L-1 visa holders and folks immigrating by other means.
The total displacement of US IT workers is near 40% or as bad as unemployment ever got during the Great Depression of the 1930s.
This is clearly not a stable situation-but the current trend is temporarily maintained with the aid of hundreds of millions in campaign donations.
When not only editorial authority over "news for nerds" is taken over by the advocates of this situation, but "representative" government itself, there are good reasons for IT professionals to be "unhappy".
