Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Telecom Immunity Flip-Floppers Got More Telecom Money

Posted by kdawson on from the stark-example dept.

ya really notes a nice analysis by Maplight.org indicating that those Democratic representatives who changed their vote on telecom immunity between March and June received on average 40% more in contributions from telecom interests than those Democrats who held firm. Maplight asks, "Why did these ninety-four House members have a change of heart? Their constituents deserve answers." Across both parties, representatives who voted for immunity in June had received almost twice as much telecom money as those who voted against. Wired's coverage includes a quote from Larry Lessig, who is on the Maplight board: "Money corrupts the process of reasoning. [Lawmakers] get a sixth sense of how what they do might affect how they raise money."

3 of 277 comments (clear)

  1. Why so hard on the Dems? by objekt · · Score: 5, Informative

    A majority of Democrats are still against the bill (105 for-128 against), whereas the Republicans almost unanimously support it (188 for-1 against).

    From TFA:
    All House Members (June 20th vote:)
    Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint gave PAC contributions averaging:

    $9,659 to each member of the House voting "YES" (105-Dem, 188-Rep)
    $4,810 to each member of the House voting "NO" (128-Dem, 1-Rep)

    --
    -- Boycott Shell
  2. Re:First of all by Lally+Singh · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hmm, before he shunned the public funding, he shunned interest group funding.

    The entire DNC can no longer take money from lobbys or special interest groups, as per his request after Hillary's withdrawal.

    He shunned the public funding b/c he could get more money through fairly honest means (mostly private citizen contributions) than the public funding with its restrictions.

    --
    Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
  3. Re:This is the change we voted for? by Thuktun · · Score: 5, Informative

    In the '06 elections, the Democrats won overwhelmingly, taking back control of both houses of Congress.

    A 49%/49%/2% split in the Senate and a slight 54%/46% majority in the House is not what I would call "overwhelming" in any fashion. If you're looking for activity, you shouldn't look to a body that's evenly split on one side and without a veto-proof majority on the other side.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110th_United_States_Congress

    Blaming Congressional Democrats for not getting done what they wanted is highly disingenuous, regardless if you agree with them or not.