Who's Still Backing SOPA/PIPA... And Why?
from the not-dead-yet... dept
With all the talk about SOPA/PIPA it's worth noting that neither bill is really dead yet, and either one could come back at any time -- though you'd hope that Senator Leahy and Rep. Smith realize that they'd be crazy to just bring the bills back without being more open about the process. In the meantime, though, there's been lots of talk about all of the elected officials who dropped off as sponsors -- and they should be rightly commended. But what about the rest? Who is still sponsoring these bills, even though they're widely recognized as being toxic... and what are they thinking? Here's the list of the remaining SOPA sponsors, according to Govtrack:- Rep. Lamar Smith
- Mark Amodei
- Joe Baca
- John Barrow
- Karen Bass
- Howard Berman
- Marsha Blackburn
- Mary Bono Mack
- Steven Chabot
- Judy Chu
- John Conyers
- Jim Cooper
- Ted Deutch
- Elton Gallegly
- Robert Goodlatte
- Peter King
- John Larson
- Thomas Marino
- Alan Nunnelee
- William Owens
- Adam Schiff
- Brad Sherman
- Debbie Wasserman Schultz
- Melvin Watt
Over on the PIPA side, the remaining co-sponsors are
- Pat Leahy
- Lamar Alexander
- Jeff Bingaman
- Richard Blumenthal
- Barbara Boxer
- Sherrod Brown
- Benjamin Cardin
- Robert Casey
- Thad Cochran
- Chris Coons
- Bob Corker
- Richard Durbin
- Michael Enzi
- Dianne Feinstein
- Al Franken
- Kirsten Gillibrand
- Lindsey Graham
- Charles Grassley
- Kay Hagan
- John Isakson
- Tim Johnson
- Amy Klobuchar
- Herbert Kohl
- Mary Landrieu
- Joseph Lieberman
- John McCain
- Robert Menendez
- Bill Nelson
- Charles Schumer
- Jeanne Shaheen
- Tom Udall
- Sheldon Whitehouse
The question then, is why others still have their names listed on these bills? Do they have a reason for it? I know that few of them -- like Senator Franken -- still keep trying to defend the bills, despite the fact that the public has spoken loud and clear that they do not support these bills. But for the rest? Why remain a sponsor of such toxic concepts?
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: pipa, protect ip, sopa, sponsors
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Isn't it obvious?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Honest Politicians!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Honest Politicians!
They are bought for life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Honest Politicians!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Honest Politicians!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Honest Politicians!
So yes, they can stay bought with no fear of backlash.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
FTFY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That might have something to do with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Which way do you want it, organizations for and against only do it because of money from influencers or those for and against may have valid reasons for their opinions?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Except that Wikipedia isn't written by any one person - ANYONE can and do edit, voluntarily. I've seen some hot debates with text changing frequently. I think if someone used an iron fist to squash editors about a company there would be revolt. It's been bad enough with just the concept of letting corporate PR departments allowed to make changes.
Or is my head in the sand?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lamar
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why don't you put the person's party next to their name?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why don't you put the person's party next to their name?
It has always been our policy that we do not name parties unless it's directly relevant to the story. Naming parties plays into the "us vs. them" storylines of the major media. This issue is not a partisan issue. Naming the party adds nothing.
In fact, I'd argue that focusing on the parties would be much more negligent than not naming them, because then people just focus on which party people belong to rather than their individual positions.
This has nothing to do with party politics.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cardin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cardin
And how does that make sense to "support" a bill that you don't support in it's current form? Why not get on OPEN's bill instead ... (one guess).
I bet all of those in congress still on that list are issuing the same sentiment in their responses. Some poor PR marketing firm has been working overtime to come up with that spin.
It might be interesting to send them all the same letter and see how many say the same things in the same way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Cardin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Cardin
I didn't know that. Thank you.
Another question is; how likely is it for a bill to reach the floor for a vote when it has few sponsors, or does that even matter?
(this would conclude my civic lesson for the day :o)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Cardin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://i.imgur.com/VbJlq.jpg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Millions of American jobs lost? Really??
Where do these guys get their numbers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And to make matters worse, not a single non-industry supported study has agreed with US industry supported studies. In fact they are routinely thrown out due to errors in how they got the numbers.
How does he explain the steady growth in entertainment spending even during a recession?
There is no excuse to be so dumb.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Just look at the global warming debate. 90% of the scientific comunity are in agreement that global warming is real and man made, but I still hear conservatives trying to claim the science is not in every now and again. As long as they keep cranking out their own 'studies' they can convince the odd citisen who isn't watching too closely that what they're doing is warrented.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
One guy pulls a random number out of the air and spreads it around for a few months. Other people quote that number repeatedly without mentioning the first guy made it up. Some other people adjust the number upwards for no rational reason. Others start quoting the new higher number. Repeat ad infinitum.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Other than that does he seriously think that SOPA will stop some Chinese companies from making and selling fake IGT gaming machines? If they're making money at it they'll keep doing it.
And just what is this "intellectual property industry" be mentions in paragraph 8?
Strikes me that any company holding so much as a single patent would be part of that and he also seems blissfully unaware that the tech industry relies on copyright for both closed and open source software a reliance that hasn't changed since the 1950s. Which would make them part of said industry too though a majority of the tech industry opposed SOPA/PIPA.
It would be more correct for him to have referred to what's now being called "the content industry" rather than Hollywood which has a nicer ring to it and is less likely to get people wondering just what Hollywood needs protection from THIS time.
Nice to know that some assistant actually read your letter/email enough to hit the function key on his/her computer to dash off this dandy form letter in return.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Business politicians
A populist, if convinced that it's for the good of the people will geek. Meaning change his vote.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The same is true for McCain. I wonder how many others?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Isn't Kohl independently wealthy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(Co-Sponsor of SOPA)
BUT Marsha Blackburn did Vote FOR: Patriot Act Reauthorization, Electronic Surveillance, Funding the REAL ID Act (National ID), Foreign Intelligence Surveillance, Thought Crimes “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, Warrantless Searches, Employee Verification Program, Body Imaging Screening, Patriot Act extension; and only NOW she is worried about free speech, privacy, and government take over of the internet?
Marsha Blackburn is my Congressman.
See her “blatantly unconstitutional” votes at :
http://mickeywhite.blogspot.com/2009/09/tn-congressman-marsha-blackburn-votes.html
Mickey
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: (Co-Sponsor of SOPA)
She is up for re-election in 2012 AND running UNOPPOSED!!!
So ... how'd you like to have her seat?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Addendum
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I apologize for the long list
R - Rep. Lamar Smith
R - Mark Amodei
R - Marsha Blackburn
R - Mary Bono Mack
R - Steven Chabot
R - Elton Gallegly
R - Robert Goodlatte
R - Peter King
R - Thomas Marino
R - Alan Nunnelee
D - Joe Baca
D - John Barrow
D - Karen Bass
D - Howard Berman
D - Judy Chu
D - John Conyers
D - Jim Cooper
D - Ted Deutch
D - John Larson
D - William Owens
D - Adam Schiff
D - Brad Sherman
D - Debbie Wasserman Schultz
D - Melvin Watt
----------------------------------
R - Lamar Alexander
R - John McCain
R - John Isakson
R - Lindsey Graham
R - Charles Grassley
R - Michael Enzi
R - Thad Cochran
R - Bob Corker
D - Pat Leahy
D - Jeff Bingaman
D - Richard Blumenthal
D - Barbara Boxer
D - Sherrod Brown
D - Benjamin Cardin
D - Robert Casey
D - Chris Coons
D - Richard Durbin
D - Dianne Feinstein
D - Al Franken
D - Kirsten Gillibrand
D - Kay Hagan
D - Tim Johnson
D - Amy Klobuchar
D - Herbert Kohl
D - Mary Landrieu
D - Joseph Lieberman
D - Robert Menendez
D - Bill Nelson
D - Charles Schumer
D - Jeanne Shaheen
D - Tom Udall
D - Sheldon Whitehouse
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I apologize for the long list
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I apologize for the long list
The reason he's lost his base is because democrats have been so spineless, giving up before there was even push-back on EVERYTHING - and NOW they grow a spine???
Disgusting. This is too blatant for any high road. The GOP courted wall street and now dem's have hollywood = economy and speech.
Democracy can't survive without either one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: I apologize for the long list
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: I apologize for the long list
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I apologize for the long list
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I apologize for the long list
It's still a matter of who has been bought and paid for and who think they're safe come the next time they're up for election.
I sincerely hope they're wrong about the safe part though realistically I'd say no. The electorate will still be stuck with choosing between tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum on election day.
I'd agree with Mike that this isn't as much a party thing as individuals who are behind this silliness no matter how they try to explain it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I apologize for the long list
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the JOBS man!
Amodei wrote me back said it was about saving IGT jobs. But they make slot machines, is there an Uzbeki website selling counterfeit Wheel of Fortune slots?!? Hmmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Just keep counting till you get the result you want...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wait... what?
I take that as a divine omen that we should support this bill!
Or bathe ourselves in the intestines of our human sacrifices to the Eldritch gods...
Either way, it's a party!
Though I think the sacrifice might lead to fewer violations of human rights...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: wait... what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: wait... what?
But never mind because that entire waste of time and money was signed away before the ink dried. It was for show only.
But they are brother's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OR "who's still a SOPA/PIPA whore"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Get rid of them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dems out
Very disappointing and surprising Boxer would co-sponsor one of these bills. Also disappointing and surprising about Franken. Not so surprising about Feinstein.
This could end up being the needed push to create a viable 3rd party because the comment above is right - the Dems are repelling an entire generation of voters and "where else will they go" won't stand with the internet generation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Those who saw the light and removed themselves were Jerry Moran (who dropped the bill way back in June of last year, realizing he had a Google server farm in his state)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's a good chance many won't vote. If Colbert doesn't appear on the ballot, I may write his name in. I trust a comedian before any of the other options. At least Stewert took 20 minutes out of his day and seemed to "get" what this was about.
The fact that news has under covered or mis-represented this issue (including ACTA, TPP, or the resistance in EU) just adds insult to injury.
I am so sick of hearing "it's complicated" prefacing any mention of these bills. I'm not in IT or computers, barely internet savy, bsarely able to set up a DVR or wireless, etc. And yet I can see the handwriting on the wall.
I would like to know exactly what the Chinese passed in 2009 that made 49% of internet websites disappear within one year (from an older article on TechDirt) that was put in place to stem piracy and how that compares with this latest round of internet bills.
How similar are they or aren't they? Who else has put in place similar laws and what was the effect of that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p20-562.pdf
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Of course, there's also the possibility that it's his ego talking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's polls, not pulls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Elections are the answer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Elections are the answer
Mostly I suspect it's the difference between the Parliamentary and Congressional systems where MPs are very closely identified with the party the electorate is so pissed at when the housecleaning takes place.
Though if this sort of thing keeps up the days of electoral carnage may not be that far off in the States when the electorate realizes that tossing the bastards out en masse every once in a while is necessary to remind them who they serve and it's not the lobbyists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ORRIN HATCH
AND he also thinks the Government should destroy computers without due process to help people "get the picture."
http://www.dethronehatch.com/orrin-hatch-is-no-friend-of-the-internet/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ORRIN HATCH
Yeah, and that guy has dropped sponsorship of the bill. That seems significant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
do you know what name you've left out?
if he were still alive, goebbels would have signed this act.
Actually, it reads just like the same laws he did pass more than 70 years ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Add State
Thanks!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Congress is taking away our freedoms: Investigative reporters, look into some of these Congressmen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SOPA, and law, law, law, law in the Land of the Free.
When enough people do that - stopped paying taxes, in other words - we'll get our country back. Not before.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]