Slashdot Mirror
Experiences w/ Tech-Savvy Politicians?
leperjuice asks: "I recently had the pleasure of speaking with John Podesta (Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff, now a visiting professor at Georgetown ) about tech issues and was pleasantly surprised: not only did he know of the DeCSS case but he knew of Jon Johansen and actually quoted an interview with him. This got me thinking; which politicos out there actually understand tech issues (rather than just have a staffer who occasionally reads Wired)? Which ones don't? What have been your experiences?"
NSA is a DoD agency and has always been one. The standard "place of employment" spiel before they put up the signs along Rt. 295 and admitted the place existed was, "I work for the department of defense at Ft. Meade."
I don't know about now, but NSA paychecks and direct deposit paystubs used to be written by the Department of Agriculture, which confused many people. This was not because of any nefarious intent, but because USDA had a huge payroll system and did the payroll & checkwriting for a lot of other agencies in the DC area.
Intelligence people from all agencies who work "openly" outside the U.S. are typically attached to the local U.S. emabassy or consulate and are usually identified as State Department employees (and are often on "temporary duty" with State) so they can claim diplomatic immunity.
- Robin
Orrin Hatch has been attacking the Music and Movie industry for one reason and one reason only...
They predominantly give money to the Democrats.
Hatch could care less about Napster, or any of the ideals or philosophy of copyright.
He is only concerned with hurting funding sources for his competition.
That's it. If the MPAA and RIAA was giving him millions for his campaign, he'd be doing his best to protect the interests of that funding.
He's like most all politicians... completely transparent.
Well, searching the site would be a start.
--
I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
a reply to all the threads below....
While most of us may disagree with Hatch's opinions on tech, the fact of the matter is, he has opinions, and they're based on some knowledge of the actual tech involved. Even if he doesn't go the same way we do, at least he knows enough to go some way on his own accord, as opposed to being pulled along with the rest of the House and Senate that have no idea what's going on.
This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U
And I don't go around labeling people "religious right" for no good reason, but Orrin Hatch has given me a few good reasons. :)
I've heard that he writes gospel music, and he likes the idea of being able to distribute it sans Mega-Corporations.
:)
Interesting intersection between the religious right and the hackers, eh?
At the same time, while I feel that the Right (hell, the Left too) has forsaken the normal citizen for corporate interests, it's interesting to see that when a legislator is directly, adversely affected by a corporate interest, all of a sudden they sing a different tune. So to speak.
I mean, if you told me that Orrin Hatch was on the Napster side of the online music distribution argument, I'd think you were nuts - if I didn't know that he had personal reasons to snub the RIAA.
With the way you worded it, you made it sound as if Bush thought having the computer on (and sitting there), did not use as much power as having the computer on AND sending email.
So what if he did? It's true.
-
Bay Area -- Feinstein, despite being a local hero, is absolutely not a friend to the local tech industry. Time after time, she has sided with law enforcement and hollywood factions against a rational encryption policy, and appears to get most of her money from down south. I have no idea what Boxer is up to, but I take it that she's there because people believe her heart's in the right place.
The guy who ran against Feinstein, Tom Campbell, (he was too much of a maverick to have any chance of winning) was pretty sharp. Stanford prof and congressman from the SV area, and very up on the anti-trust issues with Microsoft and encryption policy. Too bad he's out of government now. There's various other industry functionaries that have been elected to certain posts, but I would say that's more "chamber of commerce" than "technically saavy".
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
One politician who deserves to be recognized is Russ Feingold, the idiosyncratic senator from Wisconsin. Best known for the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill (and one of the few politicians to refuse PAC money in a campaign for national office), Feingold has also long been one of the few tech-savvy people in a notoriously over-age, anti-tech government body. His finest hour in this regard was the Leahy-Feingold bill to overturn the Communications Decency Act, which was left to the courts to litigate; but he's often spoken out on issues near and dear to the EFF, with support for encryption freedoms and online privacy.
The only Senator who really outstrips him in this area is Patrick Leahy, D-VT, who takes the lead on more tech issues (Feingold often being a co-sponsor), especially since Feingold has put so much effort into the campaign finance issue.
But especially in those early days around 1995, when hardly anyone really knew what the internet was, Feingold said on the Senate floor,
Guaranteeing the Internet is free of speech restrictions, other than the statutory restrictions on obscenity and pornography which already exist, should be of concern to all Americans who want to be able to freely discuss issues of importance to them regardless of whether others might view those statements as offensive or distasteful. Shifting political views about what types of speech are unsuitable should not be allowed to determine what is or is not an appropriate use of electronic communications. While the current target of our political climate is indecent speech (the so-called "seven dirty words"), a weakening of First Amendment protections could lead to the censorship of other crucial types of speech, including religious expression and political dissent. I believe the censorship of the Internet is a perilous road for the Congress to walk down. It sets a dangerous precedent for First Amendment protections and it is unclear where that road will end.
Very impressive. Remember, this was nineteen-ninety-five, TIME magazine was running cover stories suggesting the internet was some sinister force creeping into our homes, and most people still had to have the word explained to them. In those days, it was difficult to find anyone who would stand up for the rights of internet users, who were seen as a fringe group of suspicious characters, hackers, pornographers, terrorists and worse -- rather than today's view that the internet is a basic utility to be enjoyed by all citizens. Fortunately, shortly after this I attended a Rotary Club meeting where he spoke (we are from the same home town), and in the Q&A time I stood up and let him know that a lot of people online considered him a hero.
----
lake effect weblog
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
During his time as Swedish Prime Minister, the Swedish Government opened their first version of their website (I can't remember what year, but it was when Lynx and Mosaic were the only browsers available), and his party were very early using BBSes to distribute information throughout the organization.
He was the first swedish politician to start an on-line diary (an e-mail list), which he has (personally, actually - fairly unusual for such a high-ranking politician) updated once a week ever since '95. It was then written mostly on European airports inbetween flights and uploaded to the net using a GSM cellular phone.
I remember an interview he attended (with Stina Dabrowski if any Swede out there wonders), where he was asked about his interest for technology, and he claimed that he wasn't a tech nerd, but liked using new technology if it was better than old technology, and he had a positive attidute towards what new technology would be able to do in the future.
It is claimed in Sweden that he was the first prime minister of the world to communicate using e-mail with the US President - even if I guess it's mostly been used as a PR stunt.
It's fairly easy to sigh when comparing him with our current minister of communication and infrastructure who just a few years ago stated that "The Internet is just something that will pass by unnoticed and then being forgotten" (swedish: min tolkning av 'internet är bara en fluga').
Let's see:
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Scored higher on his SAT than former Senator Bill Bradley, and by some reports Al Gore as well
Graduated Yale with a Bachlor's degree and a higher GPA than Al Gore's Harvard undergraduate GPA
Graduated from the U.S. Air Force's Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) and flew supersonic jet fighters
Graduated Harvard Business with an MBA (that's a Masters of Business Adminstration for you folks in Palm Beach County Florida)
Yeah, a real idiot. Let's compare to Al Gore:
Graduated from Harvard with a lower GPA than Bush's Yale GPA
Flunked out of Divinity School
Flunked out of Law School
And Al Gore is considered a Genious and Bush the idiot? Whatever!
--
in which he discussed, perhaps for the first time for many Americans, including techies, the socio-economic importance of the "Information Highway."
He got it. And he got it years before many of you youngun's first heard of the internet.
A lot of people condemn Iowa as being a tech backwater. And, well, really, it is. I speak with authority, since I grew up there and fled Iowa after getting my CompSci degree; there just weren't any tech jobs there that I thought were worth having.
But there are some surprisingly clued-in politicians in Iowa when it comes to tech matters. Iowa attorney general Tom Miller is, IMO, one of the finest state AGs in the nation on tech issues. When UCITA had a full-court press going on it, Tom Miller advised the Iowa legislature that UCITA would ultimately be bad for customers; and, taking Miller's advice, the Iowa legislature passed an anti-UCITA law, making it very clear that Iowa not only does not have anything to do with UCITA, but has passed safe-harbor statutes specifying that Iowa consumers cannot be bound by UCITA.
Yes, that's right, you heard me. If you live in Iowa, you cannot be held accountable to UCITA, even if the EULA specifies that the license is enforced in a UCITA state.
The reasoning behind this is clear: no consumer contract can supersede State consumer protections. Since the State of Iowa has deemed UCITA to be dangerous, the Legislature has passed laws specifically to protect Iowans from UCITA.
Those laws wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Tom Miller pushing for them, hard, and educating a lot of the Legislature on the technical and legal implications of UCITA.
What the politician knows. What is important is whether they have any aids who do. Most bills are not written by the sponsoring rep -- they are written by the rep's legislative aids. The question is what politicians have tech savy LAs.
I think that Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) is rather tech savvy. He has held several debates and forums about the Napster case and is definately vocal against the RIAA's case against Napster. But besides the Napster deal, I still feel that all around he is pretty tech savvy (even if he is rather old).
SYSOP ('sih-sop) n.: the guy laughing at your typing.
Do a quick Google search for "Podesta" and "EFF". The EFF's Washington, DC office (back when EFF HQ was still in Cambridge) originally shared space with Podesta & Associates, and he did some legal consulting for the EFF, including helping to fight an early FBI data access plan (which sure sounds like what became Carnivore).
Of course, then he went to work for Bill & the Gang and was the person who answered EFF's questions about the good ol' Clipper Chip, with wording that amounted to "Yes, it's really secure. Trust us."
So, while in Washington, D.C., I shared with Rep. Rohrabacher, Truax's vision of a rapid-turn-around reusable system and how additional legislation we were proposing, such as giving tax incentives for capitalization of commercial space transport systems, would help guys like Truax get people to plop down their own cash to help him get started.
I was pretty exhausted both physically and financially from all the political activism, so I took a position as VP of Public Affairs with E'Prime Aerospace Corporation, initially to acquire the first Ka-band orbital slot from the FCC. It was for Norris Communications' geostationary "Norstar" satellite -- one of E'Prime's potential customers. This was all keeping an eye to attract capital for both E'Prime and Norris Communications. As part of that work, I ended up in Los Angeles. There, cable companies were interested in the high-frequency of Ka-band (and consequently smaller dishes for direct-broadcast media services). We had some potential investors interested. In the middle of the day of meetings with our potential investors, they disappeared. When we investigated, it turned out that McDonnell-Douglas had just (and I mean that day) held a press conference announcing they were going into a "public private partnership" to develop what would come to be known as the DC-X for "Delta Clipper-Experimental". In addition to satellite launching, one of the early applications touted for this vehicle was to be commercial transportation services shuttling cargo between ports on earth.
McDonnell-Douglas's headquarters were located in Long Beach, CA just a few miles from our meeting place. Long Beach, CA was Rep. Rohrabacher's district.
Seastead this.
Or how about one of him and Herr Reno covering up federal racketeering charges against Fuhr Clinton.
What about when he was a huge proponent of Carnivore and how he urged Congress to further wiretapping legislation? I wish I could find a URL for it though, specifically of him at the National Press Club. Stop being a CommiCrat and show some coherency.
By 1994, White House aide John Podesta had been called into the inner circle of the Clipper project. Meanwhile, Podesta's brother, Tony, a lobbyist and fund-raiser was representing AT&T. His donors and clients, including AT&T, were invited to participate in trade trips to China and obtain valuable export deals with Beijing. Only a year earlier, John Podesta had signed a legal statement promising not to engage in any conflicts of interest involving his brother.
John Podesta WAS a staffer. Chief of Staff is an employee of the White House, not an appointed office. Appointees must be confirmed by the Senate. Staff refers to the people within a politicians team that are paid for as part of their office expenses. This is quite ironic, given the power and influence of staff members and their role in legislation. One key difference is that they have no authority in themselves, merely acting on behalf of their poss.
For example, Ashcroft has powers granted by the legislature and the head of the DoJ. He is therefore confirmed by the Senate.
When the President hires an aide (normally done by someone assigned to this task by the Chief of Staff, who is responsible for overseeing the staff), they are not approved by the Senate.
Staff members extend the policians range by acting on their behalf.
However, in the article you state, "This got me thinking; which politicos out there actually understand tech issues (rather than just have a staffer who occasionally reads Wired)?" This is an ironic question to ask when you are excited about a Staffer understanding tech...
Alex
I wasn't doubting the power of the CoS, that's an incredibly powerful position. Nor are White House aides all minor positions... Remember Iran-Contra... The White House established a private military, multiple corporations to launder the funds, etc., all under the White House aides. They do quite a bit.
however, the Chief of Staff is NOT the same as a politician. In the cabinet, people are normally accomplished politicians... i.e. popular Senators, Governors, or the occaisional undersecretary from the last White House of that party.
When picking Cabinet members, the President has to make certain that the Senate will go along. For this reason, the people in the "official" capacity are choosen for their political skills to influence people, etc. They are done to "appease a constituency", "secure a state" for the next election, etc. Rarely are they chosen for their ability to manage the organization that they head. Bush's shortened transistion may have helped in this regard, because he plucked a LOT of No. 2s from the last GOP administration, his father's.
The Chief of Staff is choosen to get the job done. As a result, they are chosen for their political sense and administrative efficiency. Most of the Chiefs of Staff could never have been elected President or Vice President (although Cheney seems to act like a Chief of Staff at times...), but they can run the White House like nobody's business.
They are NOT a politician in the regards that Slashdotters think, but they are not an aide as you suggested that I implied. Senior level White House staff are a unique breed... influential, powerful, and significant.
Alex
my representative (state or federal) I always get a snail reply. Take that to mean whatever you like. In addition, I've chatted with my state representatives and I *know* that they don't really have an idea of what's going on. Of course, here in ol' Virginia one thing the politicians do know is that anything that keeps the tech companies (AOL, etc) happy must be good for the state....
Not that I'm a raving GB supporter but I heard his explanation for that and it seemed reasonable to me. In short, he indicated that he had used email extensively in the past to communicate with family and friends but now that he was president, all of that email (private or no) winds up in the public record. Personally, with all the shit that goes on in Washington, I don't blame him. Anyways, he couldnt email that one daughter very often as she seems to be getting locked up alot of late....:)
The Yahoo News story actually says that Bush asked federal employees to "cut back" on email, not to "send less" email. Two very different things.
With the way you worded it, you made it sound as if Bush thought having the computer on (and sitting there), did not use as much power as having the computer on AND sending email.
The actual wording indicates that Bush wanted people to use their computers less by cutting back on the time they spend in email. Seems reasonable to me.
I also suspect that Bush has a fairly good idea as to how much time an average person could waste reading non-essential email from friends/family.
This man is a professor of law, who even teaches courses on copyright law. Wouldn't you find it slightly absurd if he had somehow managed to miss the DeCSS-case? I don't really see the point of using him as an example. It is obvious that Mr Podesta must know more about these kind of issues than the average politician.
"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance" - Derek Bok
I'm a constituent of Michigan's 5th congressional district (and a minor, by the way, so no vote for me). I've been pleasantly surprised when talking to Democratic Rep. Jim Barcia. I first met Jim as a result of attending a candidate forum held a few days before the 2000 election in my home town. Jim had legislative business in Washington, and as such, couldn't make it, but was represented by a campaign worker.
During the forum, I had a chance to ask a question about whether the congressional candidates had supported the DMCA, and what they thought of its potential ramifications for independent computer scientists. While the worker couldn't provide an answer, she did take my name and phone number, and a few days later, Rep. Barcia called me at my home.
While he was be no means a geek, Jim seemed to have a very good grasp of many issues relating to technology and society (he serves on the house Science and Technology committee). We spoke about DeCSS and Napster in particular. He mentioned that his son is a Napster user, and agreed that modern record contracts are unfair to artists, relating a story about some high school friends of his who sold the rights to a rather popular song of theirs for the price of a new amp.
So, in short, I found Mr. Barcia to be very open-minded and well informed, as far as politicians go. If only the rest of the congress could be as cluefull as reps Boucher and Barcia...
Anonymous Luddite: "What do you think of the dehumanizing effects of the Internet?"
Anonymous Luddite: "What do you think of the dehumanizing effects of the Internet?"
Andy Grove: "Not Much."
Representative David Wu, the congressman for certain areas of Portland, OR, and outlying areas, has a reputation for being techincally minded. He was put on the congressional comittee on science and technology during his first term.
On the other hand, I have never heard him make a statement on any type of particular technology. Maybe people just assume he is scientifically minded because he is Asian (and no, that is not a flame...)
Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
Assuming that you're telling the truth:
There can't be that many "female DoD asymmetrical warfare specialists" running around in D.C. So, do you think maybe you've hurt your "friend" by posting here? It can't be that hard to draw up a list and start excluding people. Maybe she'll have a polygraph session bacause of you. Maybe she'll be followed. Maybe her conversations will be recorded. Oh, and did you have a Win2K license for that dual-boot you set up for her?
Between the cries of "National Security!" and "Software Piracy!" you could potentially be in a great deal of trouble, along with your friend.
Unless she's been directed to feed you exactly what they want to disseminate "from the ground up." Even then, I hope you gave her the Win2K license.
--
Freeper Logic
However, we elect our representatives primarily for their integrity and political acumen. Their knowledge of technical issues is a pleasant plus, but even more important is if they have an open mind and keen interest in adressing technical issues such as our Virginia freshman congressman, Bob Schrock who is already on key technical committees. Senator Warner can also be trusted to study, consult with aides and vote meaningfully on technical issues.
The two engineers we elected as President, Herbert Hoover and Billy Carter, were voted out of office after leading our nation to undesireable economic states, despite their strong technical background.
What's past is NOT ALWAYS prologue for the future!
We should know by now that the more politicians know about technology, the more ways they can figure out to screw it up. Gore and Clinton were quite tech-literate, and as a result we got the CDA, DMCA, and almost got the Clipper chip. I'd rather have had them asleep at the wheel.
Now, is this because her constituents are big corporations like Microsoft, or is she genuinely interested in the tech world? Who knows, but she's a million times more likey to help us geeks out than G.W. "I'm not gonna use E-mail" Bush.
Within 15 minutes I recieved a reply message with my answer: Christmas Islands. I'm telling you, this guy is GOOD. You'd think the founder of the Internet would be working on implementing IPv6 or something lofty like that, but good ol' Al never loses his touch with the common people. It's really a shame that he didn't win the election. A President with a command of his essentials like that would be a credit to the nation. I know you're all thinking one of his staffers wrote it, but you're wrong. If anyone else has had any other positive experiences with Al Gore or goatse.cx, please reply below.
I really don't get it when people think that Senator Hatch is representing the public interest when it comes to tech issues. It's irrelevant whether Senator Hatch is tech savvy, because he sure is special interest savvy. The reality is he sides with special interests (including the RIAA) where it matters - legislation. But he blows a lot of worthless hot air at PR stunts (like when he invites Napster's Shawn Fanning to testify at hearings) to throw people off track and make it sound like he is doing a grand ol' job. Actions really do speaak louder than words though;
He is responsible for the copyright tem extionsion act or CTEA (written by Hatch). More here.
He co-authored the DMCA. More here.
He got caught trying to extend the patent on Claritin for the drug maker Schering-Plough, whose private jet he used when running for president.
He's also responsible for this juicy piece
This is not a Republican vs. Demoocrat issue either. What it is though is one congressman who has managed to single-handedly rape the public interest on tech issues. The public needs to be made aware of Senator Hatch's dismal record and he needs to be held accountable for his loathsome representation of the public interest.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
about a lot. Bear in mind that that's their job. They have to help draft laws about all variety of topics. Now, when a politician has a meeting about, say, softwood tree exports, they almost always get briefings, prepared by staffers, to give them all they need to know for situations they may encounter. If they can't answer a question or deal with an issue, they give a fluffy political answer. Remember, in general, there people aren't experts on anything. They simply know enough to get by.
-MR
-Michael Roy Some people are like Slinkies. Not really useful, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down
- Dan I.
Or is it redirected, possibly to some place in Louisiana like in David Brin's Earth?
Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
Senator Orrin Hatch (see a statement about Napster) has always seemed to have a clue (and an anti-Microsoft one) about these matters. This seems to be because of geography as well -- he's served in the Senate with Novell located in his state.
Currently Australia doesn't have someone quite of that calibre. There are no more tax breaks for corporate R&D, professors in Australian Universities are stuck with declining pay rates compared to their overseas equivalents and it seems that all the worthwhile Australian inventions are being brought to market by non-Australian companies.
All of which might explain why half of the bright people I know have left to work in London, San Francisco, New York and Boston.
Where they stand on those issues is the key.
Case in Point
Dick Cheney, our VP for those of you who missed the coup, is very tech saavy. He understands the technical issues surrounding cryptography so well that as Bush Senior's Secretary of Defense he lobbied the congress to outlaw any computer cryptography to which the government did not have a key. This was in the very early 90's before most politicians had even used a computer.
I'd say that puts Dick in the head of the class when it comes to knowledge about technical issues. I'd also say that he is no friend to Slashdotters!
The AC's I can see, of course. But to put them in the same sentence with "sending email"?
My personal guess is that they have him running an Etch-A-Sketch.
He also used email extensively, at least until privacy concerns caused him to stop recently.
KTS:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Utensil.
KTS:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Utensil.
There is no contradiction.