Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Comcast PAC Gave Money To Every Senator Examining Time Warner Cable Merger

Posted by samzenpus on from the best-government-money-can-buy dept.

An anonymous reader writes in with news about money and politics that is sure to shock no one."It's no surprise that Comcast donates money to members of Congress. Political connections come in handy for a company seeking government approval of mergers, like Comcast's 2011 purchase of NBCUniversal and its proposed acquisition of Time Warner Cable (TWC). But just how many politicians have accepted money from Comcast's political arm? In the case of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which held the first congressional hearing on the Comcast/TWC merger yesterday, the answer is all of them."

17 of 133 comments (clear)

  1. Seems logical to me that they all need to recuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So let's see all of the Congress recuse themselves because of a conflict of interest, thus they can't do anything, thus...we're actually better off.

  2. This is how America ceases to be great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is how America ceases to be great. We lose our edge, because society gets hijacked and the money flows to the wrong places instead of spurring innovation.

    1. Re:This is how America ceases to be great by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We lose our edge, because society gets hijacked and the money flows to the wrong places instead of spurring innovation.

      There is a theory that Japan and Germany recovered and prospered so quickly after WWII because their profound defeat destroyed so many entrenched special interest groups that could no longer block progress.

    2. Re:This is how America ceases to be great by MichaelMonaghan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Many countries are great or have been great in their past which includes the US due to their contributions to the rest of the world. To say otherwise is simply being ignorant of the rest of the world.

    3. Re:This is how America ceases to be great by pitchpipe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      America is deluded that they were great to begin with. A super power? Maybe. But 'great'? Wtf.

      Sorry. Our founding fathers were mostly a bunch of bad asses with really good ideas that they were willing to fight for, and the country that came out of that fight was great.

      It's the money grubbing assholes who are fucking it up now by claiming that money = free speech and corporations are people. That means that the ultra rich have at least 10,000 times as much speech as most of us, and that there are a lot of people that have no voice at all. Money should not be equivalent to free speech. Never. It's a fucking travesty that it is, and the people who made it so are destroying our country. I'm not being hyperbolic here.

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
    4. Re:This is how America ceases to be great by pitchpipe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and that there are a lot of people that have no voice at all.

      The reason those people have "no voice at all" is because ... they don't have the money to pay for it. That really does make the point that money is required for the full exercise of free speech.

      In this country (the US), yes I'll give you that, but it shouldn't be that way. They've gamed the system so that the more money you have, the more speech you have, but it's a rigged system.

      I'm saying that inherently money != free speech, and that the law should reflect that. If we had a constitutional amendment explicitly stating that money != free speech then we could talk sensibly about limiting its corrupting influence. As it is now it has taken pretty much all of the power away from the people. You say "ah, but go out and vote!" Okay, I'll go vote for asshole 'A' or asshole 'B'. Those are my realistic choices. Not much of a choice there, and the billions floating around in politics ensures that will always be the case.

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
    5. Re:This is how America ceases to be great by F34nor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The term of art you are looking for is "rent seeking behavior"

    6. Re:This is how America ceases to be great by rsilvergun · · Score: 3

      Actually we're the only country that wasn't blasted into the stone age during WWII. For a brief period of time fear of communists stealing factories kept off-shoring at bay (ironically it Marx used to warn that capital flowing to where labor was cheapest was a problem). A small group of progressives dragged the rest of our country out of the uncivilized mess it was mired in (the American South didn't exactly go along with the the whole Civil Rights thing quietly, and lately they've been pushing voter suppression hard).

      I hate to say it, but I wouldn't so much as call us 'great' as I would very lucky. For most Americans prosperity was a temporary blip on the radar they're watching fade away...

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    7. Re:This is how America ceases to be great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Anon because I modded you up ( because you were rated "Troll" when I did, which I dont think was fair ).

      "Then it is a good thing that money isn't equivalent to free speech. Money is, however, as your own statements show, a requirement for full exercise of same."

      A distinction without much distinction.
      If you cant really have speech without money, then allowing money to = speech means that people without money are removed from the exercise of same.

      "And by extension, telling people they cannot spend their money to pay for speech is equivalent to creating an even larger group of people who have no voice."

      No, telling people that there are no limits on what they can spend to buy an election creates a huge group of people without voice. I'm really not sure how you cant see that.
      I have sympathy for the concept of "its mine, I should be able to use it as I like", but there comes a time when "using it as I like" injures others, and that ought not be allowed.

      "I realize that silencing opinions that one does not favor is a common goal these days, but removing the ability to exercise the right of free speech from more people isn't the solution."
      Ending the treatment of speech = money would not silence anyone's opinions. ( name one person who would be silenced ( no, having to "endure" having the same voice as a poor person for the wealthy is not being silenced ) ).
      It would end the "I'm powerful because I have lots of money, so you have to listen to me and run your campaign ( quietly, so the election boards don't see it ) as I like". I believe there is plenty of documentation of the notion that power ( and money = power to an extent ) will influence others.
      Why is it OK to silence the less wealthy? That, ultimately, is what is happening.

      Corporations are made of people who have rights. And those people already have sufficient ( and for some, more than sufficient ) voice. There is absolutely, positively no need for corporations to add in this mix.

  3. If this is not a bribery then I don't know what is by Trachman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If fact of donations will be confirmed, then Comcast lost in the court of public opinion. The merger should not be approved on the ground of anti-trust laws, unfair competition and reduced choice by consumers. At the minimum this should send a message to the future senators who will be tempted to take donations of the big business.

  4. Re:If this is not a bribery then I don't know what by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, I'm sure Comcast's management and investors totally feel bad about that whole public opinion thing.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  5. Re:If this is not a bribery then I don't know what by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If fact of donations will be confirmed, then Comcast lost in the court of public opinion

    Don't worry, there will be a squirrel event shortly and people will forget all about it. Then the merger will be quietly approved and by the time the rates go up, it will be too late.

    If you rely on the general public you will always be disappointed, they are idiots and easily lead and/or distracted.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  6. Re:If this is not a bribery then I don't know what by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not bribery, it's just a corporate person engaging in free speech. Indeed, our own dear supreme court asserts the view that this sort of activity does not even create the impression of impropriety...

  7. Welcome to America! by mmell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We're very proud here. We have the best government that money can buy!

  8. Dumb and Dumber by jtara · · Score: 3, Informative

    San Diego developers already use cable service as a criteria when house-hunting. You want to be in a Cox area! Unfortunately, most of the jobs are in Time Warner areas. Now the service will go from bad to worse...

    -- a lucky South-of-Interstate-8 developer...

  9. Re:If this is not a bribery then I don't know what by Lobachevsky · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Donations aren't bribery, because donations aren't payment _for_ anything. A bribe is payment _for_ some political action. It's completely legal to give donations. That's why prostitution is illegal but high-end escorts are legal. The high-end escort asks for a 'donation' and no service is promised. Of course, it's pretty obvious she won't give any service if there's no donation. But she doesn't _promise_ service for a donation. It's just that her reputation as an escort will suffer if she takes the money and runs. If she does turn tricks and the police catch her, she gets off scott free under the story that she independently fell in love and wanted a night of romance wit the John, which had _nothing_ to do with with the "donation". Senators and other politicians are high-end escorts of a different shade.

  10. News? by EMG+at+MU · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This would have been news if Comcast didn't give every member of congress that had anything to do with their merger money.

    People don't care anymore. The people in power have switched the conversation from us (regular people) vs them (those in positions of power) into us ("democrats") vs us ("republicans"). If you point out that huge corporations bribe congress someone will point out that huge unions bribe congress. If you point out that the oil/gas sectors bribe republicans someone will point out that hollywood bribes democrats. We can't have a conversation about how it is wrong for any special interest to have that much influence just because of $ because we are too busy beating each other over the head.

    The argument people have now is: "my special interest should be lobbying, your special interest shouldn't".