Rep. Paul Ryan Comes Out Forcefully Against SOPA After Reddit Pumps Up Opposing Candidate
from the well,-look-at-that... dept
This is kind of interesting. You may recall that, last month, when Reddit was casting about for a pro-SOPA candidate to oppose (along with an opponent they could back), for a little while they picked Rep. Paul Ryan. The Reddit community was actually looking for a politician who had supported both the NDAA and SOPA, and originally chose Ryan. This actually turned out to be a mistake, because Ryan did not support SOPA and his campaign quickly pushed out a statement to that effect. However, some of the wheels were already in motion, and Ryan's main opponent for his seat, Rob Zerban, quickly embraced Reddit, and was able to raise $15,000 in just 48 hours for his anti-SOPA position.And while some had used this story to mock the potentially over-zealous crowd at Reddit... it looks like it did have an impact. Going further than his original statement, saying that Rep. Ryan was not a SOPA supporter, Ryan has now come out strongly against SOPA:
"The internet is one of the most magnificent expressions of freedom and free enterprise in history. It should stay that way. While H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act, attempts to address a legitimate problem, I believe it creates the precedent and possibility for undue regulation, censorship and legal abuse. I do not support H.R. 3261 in its current form and will oppose the legislation should it come before the full House."So, it looks like even if they got it wrong initially, the whole effort did certainly (1) make SOPA into a campaign issue for Ryan and (2) lead him to come out with a clear statement against the bill. And, yet, Lamar Smith still thinks there's no real opposition.
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: campaign issue, copyright, free speech, paul ryan, pipa, protect ip, rob zerban, sopa
Companies: reddit
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Only because
As with Ryan it is clear that only the actual threat of losing their position of power can get our politicians to actually act in the interests of the people they are supposed to represent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Only because
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Only because
He's not as technically savvy as I am, but he knows what broken internet means to him. Hopefully there are more like him to turn this clown out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Only because
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Only because
At least until the election is over.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vocal minorities
/sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Vocal minorities
/sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Vocal minorities
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paul Ryan is collateral damage
This may not have been innocent since Paul Ryan is probably the Representative that the Democratic party would most like to see defeated. His budget proposal changed the discussion over the past year, from stimulus to fiscal responsibility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Paul Ryan is collateral damage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Paul Ryan is collateral damage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mistake?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mistake?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I know he doesn't like to say that, but that's the result of his proposals.
Talk about your class wars: he wants someone like me, age 39, to continue to pay into a system that I will not get as I am under 55. All in the name of 'preserving Medicare'.
Just a way to buy off the votes of the old against the young. What chaps my ass is that there seem to be a large number of people who are for this madness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ahem:
I want either less corruption of more opportunity to participate in it.
http://www.despair.com/corruption.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I am complaining that he wants to kill Medicare such that I will pay into the system my entire working life and yet receive a ridiculously reduced benefit under the crappy terms of his voucher plan.
There's no inconsistency here. I like Medicare, and I don't have a problem with supporting it. I just want it for me and all Americans, not just the currently old.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Medicare
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Medicare
His plan, which they call 'preserving Medicare' does nothing of the sort.
It keeps it in name only whilst replacing it with a defined priced voucher. You can then take this voucher to a health care company and pay the differences out of pocket.
I'm sure that this will be a completely fair market and won't be disadvantageous against the patient. No sir. Businesses always deal fairly with captive markets.
It is Orwellian doublethink to call something 'preserving' when it guts it entirely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Medicare
But, it's somewhat disadvantageous when Medicare goes bankrupt too. Hmmm. Maybe we should try to fix it first before we declare the solution a "gutting"...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare
Any future potential problems could be easily remedied by raising the maximum income level that is taxed for Medicare.
And sorry, anything that takes what used to be covered and turns it into something that requires cash is a 'gutting'. It would also give massive incentives to blow the roof off of health care spending.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare
Vouchers are the best solution I've heard...still no other plan to stop the insolvency except the good old kick-the-can-down-the road-plan...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare
Vouchers are the best solution I've heard...still no other plan to stop the insolvency except the good old kick-the-can-down-the road-plan...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare
government debt is not the same as household debt.
macroeconomics are not accounting.
We do not have an unmanageable government debt at present. To say otherwise is to betray your lack of knowledge about economics or that you have been otherwise induced into your position.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Medicare
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare
But seriously, brilliant fixes on the forums aside, I don't pretend to know how to fix this. I do know that saying the government getting out of the healthcare business will *raise* prices is silly. Find one instance where government stepped aside and prices went up and you'll have your case for more regulation.
As to paying for a system at 39 that you won't see if they *gut* it... Imagine how some people feel about paying for public school when they went to a private one. How about someone who's never abused drugs paying taxes that go to treatment! That would all fall under betterment of society cost. So would be medicare payments as the system was phased to a stable one.
Since I switched to an HSA I spend less on healthcare then ever and use it more! Now, when I need an xray (as my daughter did last week), I call a couple imaging places and let them know I'm shopping around. After 3 calls, I found someone willing to do it for half the price of the other 2. Sold. My total cost was less than what I'd have payed in co-pays and monthly premium and my insurance got billed $0 so there's no one getting screwed. When you tell someone you can pay up to $300, they'll charge $300. If you tell someone you are shopping for a deal, they will charge a fair price. You can't assume people are inherently going to try to help you at their own expense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare
Right now, overall, the US is #1 in cost and #37 in outcomes. So, every industrialized country pays less and gets better care. More government involvement in those countries has led to better outcomes and a lower price, in large part by having a massive risk pool and thus power to drive down prices.
Also, people who don't understand the value of public schools to themselves, even if they did not attend them, or have children that attend them...I just don't understand that myopia. For instance, if we have an inexpensive path for smart people to become doctors, or engineers, or whatever, that makes all of our lives better.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare
No regulation, just good old fashioned Bazaar-level haggling to get the lowest price with the highest quality. While you were able to get a price break in a bad economy, imagine the savings power 100-300 million participants can extract during any economic situation.
The market, to run efficiently needs to have equal power on both sides of the transaction to get the best results at the lowest price point. In your case, you had access to three competing labs whereas someone in a rural community may have access to only one - the math is compelling and no limited vouchers required...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare
And this notion that if you attach a business to government that it will magically transform the government into a competitive market. That's a whopper!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare
What happens when they pick one though? Obviously, with no customers left, there would be NO OTHER OPTION. Suddenly, there's only one option and the price goes up, up, up! That's how monopolies work. There's no one left to haggle with after the first purchase in your scenario.
Plus it's up to one entity to decide what's "best". To be fair, I simply don't trust the government negotiating on my behalf. I have confidence that I can do better. Look up the airlines when they were government controlled as an example. I encourage you to site a counterpoint where the government taking over offered a better value.
Even with that consideration aside, there are unintended consequences to single payer you haven't mentioned. I'm not going to play the "death panel" card as that's just dramatizing a serious point. I will say that we simply cannot afford to give everyone, every treatment, every time. If it takes 20 people to keep 1 person alive for 1 more year then you have to make a choice. There's a massive talent shortage as it is (I'm in healthcare recruiting) at the specialist level up. You're arguing about driving down the cost when we can't keep doctors working as it is! Your concern for the rural community is even more compelling when you're suggesting we send Uncle Sam to the door so he can tell them their paycheck is about to be cut in half. They aren't going to just eat the pay cut and smile! They will retire or move their practice.
Playing with peoples unmentionables and looking down their ear canal is not "fun" work. Finding smart enough people to do it effectively is its own challenge. I guess we could make them be doctors.
Finally, who's going to pay when they make a mistake? How about when someone says they were made to feel uncomfortable so they need a lifetime of therapy? The taxpayers should pick up the tab? Insurance companies have begged to have some recourse for frivolous lawsuits and been denied, the government would be even more susceptible!
I don't have the answers, I just know that anyone who thinks there's this "easy solution" like a single payer system isn't giving the issue its fair amount of consideration.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
We are close to a stage where people can even manufacture some of the very instruments needed in such places and part of the drugs needed.
So from my perspective if Medicaid goes away it would be a good thing, simply because it is a mistake to put your interests in the hands of others, it is a mistake to trust your health to others that have different interest than you or me, now more important is a Medicaid gone with laws changed that promote the free creation of said health centers there is a lot of red tape and that is a barrier, that doesn't improve the health of people, but maintain the costs high.
But maybe people should start small, like health centers that can be used for check ups, collection of samples and start of production of medicine that is rechecked elsewhere.
I was just thinking about these things this week, the premise was "how a modular public service would look like" and firefighters modules, police modules, hospital modules came to mind, the modules would interlock with each other and form rooms and spaces, so you can have good services anywhere as long as you are able to train the people who will man it appropriately.
To support those things there is also should be a sewer treatment module, food production module, manufacturing modules.
Lego cities LoL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Good look in performing your own anesthesia and surgery.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Phuket
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Compare that to money bombs people have done for other candidates, those people often get over a million dollars in a couple of days. Heck, the guy who stood up and shouted "YOU LIE" to the president during a state of the union speech and his opponent both raised 1.5 million dollars in a week over that incident.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Look, even this guy thinks it is too far!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Butt
It is well known that politicians do votes that make the majority of the public happy near election time. All the bribe money in the World helps them none if public do not like them and vote for a rival.
So reminding them who's butt is on the line should win us a few extra politicians to vote against SOPA and PIPA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: newly established content provider
/sarcasm
at the end of that post.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: newly established content provider
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: newly established content provider
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It didn't sound to me like he was against SOPA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Either they put it right in the form letters they send to us or shut up.All you have there is one of those stupid form letters.
SOPA/PIPA = WAR and if it passes I hope there is a ton of hacking & cracking that will make wikileaks look like kindergarden.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When the politicians and judges know that they can be shot at by the people whos rights they are trying to infringe, then the government fears the people and there is freedom and liberty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The second amendment does not give you the right to assassinate your elected officials. My God...what a warped sense of freedom we have.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Can you use a gun to protect yourself from somebody coming to take away your rights? Certainly! You may be killed and portrayed as a nut by government controlled media but ultimately, who is the assassin?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Guiding Policy
The National Rifle Association's policy is that the candidate has to publicly go hunting, shoot some ducks or whatever, and if he doesn't, he is presumed to be in favor of gun control.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Single Payer = Payer Other Than Me
It's always more fun to spend Somebody Else's money.
The idea that "spreading the risk in a big pool" is better for everyone is a sham. It's not better for fully half the people -- the ones who need less medical care than the average. In a "single payer" system, they pay more than the cost of their health care. That's why Obamacare's basic premise was to force healthy, young people to buy insurance that they didn't want. Insurance is more expensive than what they are doing now: buying their health care directly with their own money. Obama wants to overcharge those healthy people to subsidize the chronically sick. (This doesn't even get into the moral hazard epitomized by the obese medicare diabetics who chow down on junk food while sitting in government-funded dialysis centers. Why take responsibility for your own health when "Somebody Else" will pick up the tab?)
I have no insurance, by choice, and I get great medical care. And I get it at reasonable prices (or else I go elsewhere). Here's an analogy. I went to two or three body shops to get quotes on fixing my fender after a crash? Their initial quotes were all outrageous. Then they found out I was going to pay for it myself. They immediately dropped the price in half, and were very curious to know what the other places had quoted. I got the job done for well under half the "insurance company" price, merely by caring what I paid for it because it was coming out of MY pocket. I've had the same thing happen with health care when I shop around.
I have friends who are doctors. They usually have a full time staff person who chases down insurance companies, most of whom don't pay the doctor for six months or more. The cash patients keep the doctor's business alive and don't cost an arm and a leg to collect. At least with a self-paying patient, the doc knows when dispensing the care whether they are getting paid or doing charity work. They can make a choice about how much charity work they want to do.
The reason US health care is so expensive is exactly because Somebody Else is paying for it - mostly an insurance company that's paid by your employer, or a government agency. So, of course, the morons in DC want to make it worse rather than better.
PS: people without insurance DO have health care. They have plenty of health care. The uninsured are not stupid and do not need to be coddled by you-all. They buy health care the same way they buy food, housing, or CDs. With money. That they earn by working. Get off our backs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SOPA/ PIPA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]