Comment by DanielBMarkham | Hacker News Reader

Comment by DanielBMarkham | Hacker News Reader

Protect IP and its House counterpart, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), are strongly supported by the entertainment industry, organized labor and business groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Well there you go. If you made a list of the top ten groups that give money to Congressmen these guys would definitely be in it. And because they support both parties, guess what? It's biparisan! Something to vote on so you can say that Washington really works. It's just not all gridlock. Hey, look at me! I'm reaching across the aisle to get things done.

If you were some uneducated Congressperson, probably a lawyer/political hack who came up through the ranks, this looks on the outside like just the kind of vote to take home to the voters. I'm your man. I'm stopping internet pirates, protecting the innocent. Think of the children!

I have to laugh, but in reality it's a sad mess we're in. These pressure groups are going to keep at it until something like this passes, whether it's this year or ten years from now. We are well and truly fucked.

I'm glad Google is speaking up on this. I only wish more folks would listen. If you haven't contacted both your House and your Senate guys, now is the time to do it.

"If you made a list of the top ten groups that give money to Congressmen these guys would definitely be in it."

Not sure that's true, esp. in reference to organized labor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_States#L... http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=s

The dollar values may show this, and these numbers show you're right. However, influence wise, unions have massive sway because of the breath / consistency of their voter block - which provides a higher ROI on their lobbying money.

You mean, because they have a bunch of people who vote for politicians? I'm pretty sure that's how things are _supposed_ to work.

No. Because they are the biggest buyers of influence on the hill. It has absolutely nothing to do with having a bunch of people, just a bunch of money.

13 out of the biggest 20 donors are unions. http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A

Sorry, but that's like looking at Hawaii and saying the US is a tropical country. You're ignoring 90% of the money spent by organizations to influence Congress.

Donations are only one small way that money influences the hill. If they were as effective as lobbying, you wouldn't see 10X the money being spent on that.

To me, any concentration of power, whether unions, corporations, etc. is dangerous to democracy. These people each voting their own mind is one thing, but these orgs encourage zombie voters that always vote the same way - while having central leaders to play / pay hard. This is very different from politicians just looking out for their voters.

Concentration of power via voting groups is a fundamental part of the democratic process, be it via representatives creating factions within legislatures or voters banding together to create political groups. (In the end, the Democratic and Republican party are essentially that.) Doing so allows smaller factions that have a single driving issue to have some political impact by focusing their voting behavior on that one axis.

What's the difference between that list and this one? http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A

This list makes it look like unions dominate elections.

The former is a list of the total spent on lobbying, while the latter is political donations (campaign donations, essentially).

Campaign donations are much smaller, and much more regulated, than money spent on lobbying. Maybe the poster meant only donations, but it seems an artificial distinction to me to say that regulated campaign donations are the only way that special interest groups "give" money to congress.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com