Revolving Door: Sixteen Former Judiciary Committee Staff Are Lobbying Congress Concerning SOPA

from the feeling-of-corruption dept

Thu, Dec 15th 2011 12:12pm — Mike Masnick

We recently wrote about two Congressional staffers who were very active in the SOPA/PIPA debate leaving Congress to work as lobbyists for the entertainment industry, helping to get those bills passed. This is a well-trodden path. The Sunlight foundation highlights how there are sixteen former Judiciary Committee staffers currently lobbying over copyright issues, and the vast, vast majority of them are working for groups in favor of these bills. There are just two working for those opposed to the bills. This kind of revolving door between Congress and lobbyists remains quite troubling. At the very least, it raises questions about who the staffers are really working for when they're in Congress: the people... or their future employers?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, judiciary committee, lobbying, pipa, protect ip, sopa

41 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

The eejit (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:04pm

They all should be shot for treason and terrorism against the general public. Copyright, as is, is horribly skewed in favour of a small number of "Imaginary People" (oh, look, that abbreviates to IP! What are the odds?) at the expense of the general public, who are treated like terorists and criminals for doing what is federally mandated in the Constitution.

The time to take arms is now. As soon as SOPA is signed into law, report every single Congressman/Senators's website who voted for this for copyright infringement to everyone, as well as every single major studio, label and TV station. Then, perhaps, after all their money has been frozen, their sites seized and no definitive recourse given, they might understand.

These traitorous fucks deserve nothing. Not even mockery.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:17pm
  
  Re:
  They certainty don't care about the peoples needs.
  However, they do show remarkable concern for their own welfare.
  
  I do feel prison is a good deal for them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:32pm
  
  Re:
  "They all should be shot for treason and terrorism against the general public."
  
  In China there is a good chance they'll be executed (China has executed one of their top FDA officials for accepting bribes). In the U.S. it's considered free market capitalism and hence rewarded.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:35pm
    
    Re: Re:
    (now I don't think they should be executed, but perhaps jail time should be considered).
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Bengie, 15 Dec 2011 @ 1:24pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      We need poetic justice. Screw prison. They should be forced to live in project housing and work in a minimum wage job for 5 years, or be forced into the military for a full tour.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - ltlw0lf (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 3:15pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        forced into the military for a full tour.
        
        I doubt the military would want most of them. The military has a strict code of Ethics and the UCMJ. This sort of activity would be something that the military would look down upon (as is true for most federal employees, who would find themselves in jail for this sort of activity.)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - TtfnJohn (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 7:54pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I was kinda thinking they could all be shipped up to a little town called Alert at the northern end of Baffin Island in Arctic Canada. The closest land in Canada to the North Pole.
        
        Summer lasts all of a week or two. Maybe three. So for the rest of the year they could lobby polar bears not to eat them. Might work.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 6:56pm
  
  Re:
  They all should be shot for treason and terrorism against the general public.
  
  �Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats.�
  
  ��H. L. Mencken
  �
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 9:49pm
  
  Re:
  why don't you piss off and mind the affairs of your own country?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The eejit (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 11:55pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Oh, don't worry, I have a lot of traitorous fucks in my own country. Most of them happen to be called David Cameron.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeff (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:12pm

A man who causes fear cannot be free from fear.
- Epicurus
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hephaestus (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 3:20pm
  
  Re:
  Yeah case in point ....
  
  A Paranoid Congressman Rep. Bob Etheridge (D-NC) Assaults Student on Washington Sidewalk
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Doe, 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:18pm

Follow the money
At the very least, it raises questions about who the staffers are really working for when they're in Congress: the people... or their future employers?

I don't think it raises the question, it answers it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:20pm
  
  Re: Follow the money
  Up-vote for insightfullness.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Violated (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:18pm

The tighter Copyright enforcement tries to grip society the more aspects will slip through their fingers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:26pm

A nit, but the article says the number is 3, and not 2.

Lobbyists sell a scarcity...access, and who gets the benefit of such scarcity depends upon who hires them.

Sounds to me as if the opposed companies have been a bit slow on the draw in securing their services.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Planespotter (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:34pm

Part of the economy of influence that corrupts our government today is that Capitol Hill has become, as Representative Jim Cooper put it, a "farm league for K Street."

Watch Lessig @ Google on Youtube.

Campaign donations/contributions when in Government = Jobs after Government... and that goes for researchers, secretaries and all the usual Senate / Congress hangers on.

Get the $ out of Government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
abc gum, 15 Dec 2011 @ 12:54pm

"Congressional staffers who were very active in the SOPA/PIPA debate leaving Congress to work as lobbyists for the entertainment industry"

I thought prostitution was illegal.
Two sets of rules - again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hephaestus (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 3:23pm
  
  Re:
  High Court, Low Court again ...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 1:03pm

At the very least, it raises questions about who the staffers are really working for when they're in Congress: the people... or their future employers?

Who pays to put politicians in office?

Once you answer that - answer this: by virtue of the above answer then, who do politicians represent?

And thirdly; who hires the staffers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 1:37pm

S M E A R!

Congrat Mike, slipping further into the muck. You can't argue the contents well enough, so now you are down to trying to tar and feather people.

Desperation. It's ugly!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- pbarker (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 1:51pm
  
  Re: S M E A R
  I would think you, AC, of all people would oppose SOPA/PIPA.
  
  Once these bills pass and become law, ICE will start seizing web sites at an incredible rate, likely starting with Techdirt!
  
  When Mike is no longer on the web - what will you do with your time?
  
  Maybe just sit there and mock round things for not having corners?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 1:54pm
    
    Re: Re: S M E A R
    Why would they seize Techdirt? Mike is full of himself, but he rarely if even intentionally breaks the law.
    
    Perhaps you would like to scare monger some more, maybe you will tell me that the http protocol will be outlawed and we will all be stuck back using Archie.
    
    "Maybe just sit there and mock round things for not having corners?"
    
    Nah, I'll just mock idiots for not adding much to the discussion.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - pbarker (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 2:12pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: S M E A R
      Of course, the government is here to help. Trust them, for they would never ever abuse power, right?
      
      Lets just make all laws broad enough to be applied in almost any situation. Who needs to be presumed innocent until proven guilty?
      
      (And - Archie? Really? Cranky old guy showing his age.)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Hephaestus (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 4:14pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: S M E A R
        "Archie? Really? Cranky old guy showing his age."
        
        He is probably not old. He probably heard Hollywood is turning Archie into feature length film.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        TtfnJohn (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 8:01pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: S M E A R
        He's still pissed cause his proposed RFC for the http protocol that said every third data packet has to contain his name, one of his famous wise quotations and a bill for $1 delivered straight to the browser was turned down as being idiotic.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Hephaestus (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 9:05pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: S M E A R
        Yeah, I read that RFC. Didn't it include roman orgies, sheep, and a never ending spigot of wine, running out of his 56k DSL internet connection?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Not That Chris (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 2:17pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: S M E A R
      "...he rarely if even [sic] intentionally breaks the law."
      
      But isn't that one of the (many) major problems with SOPA/PIPA? Intent doesn't matter. Hell, guilt doesn't seem to matter, so why would intent.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Hephaestus (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 9:08pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: S M E A R
        Didn't you get the memo? Guilt and Intent no longer matter. It is all about who you know, and which court you can gain access to. The high court and a slap on the wrist for people who fund politicians, and the low court for everyone else.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - abc gum, 15 Dec 2011 @ 2:18pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: S M E A R
      "Why would they seize Techdirt?"
      
      Wow, not understanding the implications of that which you desire can only lead to frustration.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - TtfnJohn (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 8:07pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: S M E A R
      At least the idiots add more than you do. Like intelligence, reason, proficiency and some level of understanding.
      
      You'd just rather stand on the side of the road tossing fresh cowpies and passing cars and complaining about the side splatter when they hit what you through them at.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 9:53pm
    
    Re: Re: S M E A R
    I would think you, AC, of all people would oppose SOPA/PIPA.
    
    Once these bills pass and become law, ICE will start seizing web sites at an incredible rate, likely starting with Techdirt!
    
    Really FUDboy? That's all you got?
    
    When Mike is no longer on the web - what will you do with your time?
    
    Watch the anti-terror internet surveillance bill unfold
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The eejit (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 11:59pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: S M E A R
      Ah, so you are a fascist. Makes sense, I guess. It explains why you never can see the possibilities. After all, the Stalinists had their artistic schools stifled first. bThe same with mid-1930s Germany and early Maoist China.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 2:15pm
  
  Re:
  "so now you are down to trying to tar and feather people."
  
  So the question is why does Mike have so much ammunition to work with then? Shouldn't that be troubling? Shouldn't these potential conflicts of interest not exist?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 3:35pm
  
  Re:
  Swing and a miss. These people all had jobs in Congress, at one level or another. They now "lobby" on behalf of vested interests to get the laws they want.
  
  Even India at the hieight of its corruption problems didn't do so quite so openly as Congress. This says almost as much about the psyche of those on the Hill as it does about those same vested interests.
  
  The whole system needs torching in order for Americs to survive as a republic, and not a dictatorship.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 8:15pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Yeah, what a bad idea... hiring people who know how government works. Fucking stupid as hell!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The eejit (profile), 16 Dec 2011 @ 12:00am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Once you leave government, there should be a 20-year bar on coming back in any capacity, even as a lobbyist. This reduces the chance of those peoiple waiting for those "cushy jobs" with vested interests.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dave Records (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 9:08pm

From Government to Lobbyist
When I sign a contract for consulting, part of the contract is a non-compete clause for anywhere from a year to two. We should have the same clause for congressional staff and elected representatives, only it should be 5 years so there original contacts in Congress have grown cold. Better yet, do away with lobbying, but at least the non-lobby clause would be a start.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
tsavory (profile), 15 Dec 2011 @ 10:37pm

Movie Ref
In the movie distinguished gentleman Eddie Murphy implied it best at the end when he made references to all the cons he pulled before were nothing compared to the ones he pulled in congress only difference is the ones in congress were legal.
i would have quoted hi but I don't remember the exact words and I would not want Techdirt taken down for infringement even if I did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Dec 2011 @ 11:32pm

Why are those lobbyist not in jail for corruption?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 16 Dec 2011 @ 12:01am
  
  Re:
  Because BOOTSTRAPS! or TERORRISM! Or BECAUSE WE SAY SO!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]