Microsoft's Political Lobbying Record 330
pierreduFwench writes "With the U.S. national elections just around the corner, you may find this interesting: Opensecrets.org, a website focusing on 'Responsive Politics' recently published lobbying and donations info for the 2002 elections (to date). You can see the breakdown of
Microsoft's individual dossier here. Also, looking at the 'Top Donations by Industry', you may notice that Microsoft is, conspicuously, the only entry under 'Computers/Internet.'" Very interesting graphs.
Is Open Secrets so incomplete then? (Score:2, Interesting)
Interesting... (Score:5, Interesting)
Under the table? (Score:5, Interesting)
Maria Cantwell (Score:2, Interesting)
She had to be bailed out after her company and their lousy spyware bloatware crashed and burned, and is now ironically bringing in lots of money from the infamous creators of Windows Media: Microsoft.
More info:
http://www.cantwellscash.com/ [cantwellscash.com]
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin0
And the winner is... (Score:5, Interesting)
MS clocked in with $9.5M, where AOL spent $12M, and AT&T clocked in with a whopping $17.5M!! Man, I wish they'd lobby me for something...
Microsoft is everywhere ! (Score:2, Interesting)
The real problem... (Score:2, Interesting)
...is politics in general. As many people,so tritely, observe... people who want power are usually very self-centered and have no concern for the betterment of their fellow man. This is, sadly, completely out of alignment with what politics were originally intended to be. Let's take a look at the official definition of politics and break it down:
The science of government; that part of ethics which has to do with the regulation and government of a nation or state, the preservation of its safety, peace, and prosperity, the defense of its existence and rights against foreign control or conquest, the augmentation of its strength and resources, and the protection of its citizens in their rights, with the preservation and improvement of their morals.
Let's also consider that politics is considered a science, where "science" is taken to mean:
Any branch or department of systematized knowledge considered as a distinct field of investigation or object of study.
By this definition, a politician should have a great body of knowledge regarding ethics, citizens and their rights and proper morals. If you apply that branch of logic to the politicians of the last few decades, we find that there is something that has slowly gone seriously wrong. Our politicians tend to be anything but knowledgable, ethical, moral or have any concern for citizen's rights!
We will start with our current administration. The polls say that G.W. Bush has had anywhere from a 49% approval rating [go.com] at lowest and as high as his post Sept. 11th rating of 93%. While this speaks well of him, it completely obscures many well known facts regarding his knowledge (quite lacking), ethics, morality and feelings on citizen's rights. If we delve deeper, we find that he, in fact, has very little knowledge about the system. Further evidenced by the fact that he is a poor speaker and his father's former cabinet appears to be running the entire show. He is just a mouthpiece.
Regarding ethics, I would question any politician's ethics who would have other men in thir cabinet involved in scandal [time.com]. Especially in a position so close to the power seat as vice-president Cheney. Mr. Cheney's desire to conceal the connections between Enron and the current administration are very disheartening. Even the staunchest conservative must admit that this was not one of the finer moments in conservative history. (The liberal-controlled media argument doesn't wash here either as the news sources that reported negatively on this story tend to be just as far right as you can get.)
While Mr. Bush professes to being a good christian. He hasn't always been that way. His morals [realchange.org] are not exactly what one would call "good". It's very well known the George W. Bush, was quite the party down, rich kid. As he grew away from his "youthful errors", he became quite the shady businessman. I would have to say that his morals are questionable at best.
Citizen's rights and the current administration are at odds with each other. This has been an ever increasing problem since Sept. 11th. As most Americans blindly wave their flags, their ability to do much of anything else to affect their own well being is being erroded by things like "The Patriot Act" [thebyteshow.com]. In the name of security, the man in the white house and his staff are trying to convince us that it's good to lose your freedoms sometimes. This is quite damning evidence that he does not understand or care about the citizen's of this country's rights.
Seeing that all of this is true, it appears that George W. Bush fails to live up to the definition of what a politician should be, as do many of his cabinet.
The last administration has it's blemishes on many counts as well. Analyzing Mr. Clinton in the same way, we find that his knowledge of the governmental system was stronger than Mr. Bush's. (If anyone can provide links that prove otherwise please do so, I couldn't find any.)
Where ethics are concerned, Bill Clinton had his share of gaffes [mit.edu]. Not to mention the more serious allegations [robinsweb.com] regarding his time as Governor of Arkansas. No... Sadly, we can't say that Mr. Clinton has shiny repution either.
Everyone knows about his moral problems [realchange.org] since they've been beaten to death. Like him or not, Bill Clinton was not a man of morals by strict definition.
As geeks, we all know that it was his administration that passed the DMCA which has potential to seriously impinge on citizen's rights. Not just your ability to "swap songs", but you ability to write code freely!
So, by the same analysis, Bill Clinton fails the test of what a good politician is. As do most other politicians. Why is this? Because we are humans. We have imperfections that prevent us from being able to truly hold to the ideals of what how politics should work. Some do better than others, but in general the lot of them are corrupt.
Most politicians are only interested in politics due to their hunger for power. Just that alone is damning as it points to a deep seated greed and selfishness that is almost required to be a politician. So how is it that our system even works? In reality, it doesn't.
Most of what the operations of the government and the way they affect us are almost 100% happily incidental. Ocassionally one person somewhere deep in the system does one thing right. Another one somewhere else in the system does something else right. And so on... There are the few people here or there who intentionally or unintentionally (They're human, remember?) do something wrong. But the aggregate result is something that more or les resembles a system that works. This illusion trickles upward toward the leaders (Senators, congressmen, governors, and ultimately the president) and makes them look good. (It works this way in any large organization) So... for now we are stuck with a system that appears to work, but is solely based on chance. Or looking at it another way, real politics (as opposed to the ideal defined above) is just another form of gambling.
In closing, I'll offer you this joke about politics:
Son: Dad, I have a special report for school. Can I ask you a question?
Dad: Sure son, what's the question?
Son: What is politics?
Dad: Well son, let's take our home for example. I am the wage earner, so let's call me the management. Your mother is the administrator of the money, so let's call her the government. We take care of you and your needs, so let's call you the people. We'll call the maid the working class and your baby brother the future. Understand?
Son: I'm not really sure dad, I'll have to think about it.
That night, the boy is awakened by his baby brother's crying, so he went to see what was wrong. Discovering that the baby had a heavily soiled nappy, the boy went to his parent's room and found his mother fast asleep. He than went to the maid's room, where, peeking through the keyhole, he saw his father in bed with the maid. The boy's knocking went totally unheard. The boy went back to his room and went to sleep.
The next morning...
Son: Dad, I think I understand politics.
Dad: That's great son, explain it to me in your own words.
Son: While the management is screwing the working class, the government is fast asleep, the people are being completely ignored and the future is full of shit.
---Whew! All that work just to post this---
-I am a Windows user
-I am also a f4g0rt
-All Windows users are f4g0rtz
-Bill Gates loves men
-Linux is the sux0rz
-BSD is dying
-Stephen King loved goatse.cx before he died
-75% of people in the US make up 3/4 of the US population
-Adolph Hitroll is my bitch
-RecipeTroll loves the cock too
-Natalie Portman is naked and petrified
-I poured hot gritz down my pants and all I got was this lousy T-shirt
-R.M.S. is a commie
-Linus Torvalds is keeping his brotha down. Free him!
-Looser = Loser and vice-versa. Stop complaining and learn New English
-Imagine a Beowulf cluster of trolls
-The CowboyNeal jokes are old
-X is unstable, let's get rid of it
-KDE is the sux0rz, GNOME rules
-Real men use TWM
-vi is better then emacs (no it's not, emacs is better than vi)=Tastes great/Less Filling
-Ford sucks
-Chevy sucks
-Capitalism is dying
-Linux on the desktop is dead
-IE won the browser war, give it up Mozilla. (No. The war's not over yet M$)
-MySQL is robust and scalable
-PostgreSQL is better than MySQL. Nyah!
-So you like your pages W I D E N E D?
-I 4m 1337. giv3 m3 w4r3z d00dz.
-w00t!
-In other news...
-1. Steal concept from open sores 2. ??? 3. Profit!!!
-RMS is a dirty hippie
-Moderation sucks
-UNIX will never be as secure as VMS
-GayPee is not a hacker, he's a dork
-General strike!! Now!!!!!!
-ESR is a homo
-Grok THIS you GIMP!
-Corporations are evil
-Corporations are good
-Quake is the sux0rz, give me Unreal Tourney! (You Canadian f4g0rt, UT sucks, Quake 0wnz j00)
-Canadians are gay
-Americans are stupid
-Brits are assholes
-For hot gulrz see: http://www.bakla.net
-~the fux0rz has spoken~-
Re:Interesting... (Score:5, Interesting)
His lawyer stated it would cost him $40,000 to guarantee him his freedom. Interestingly, one of his "partners" happened to be a judges son, who got off free. Since my uncle didn't have a defense fund, he is now thankfully serving time and is not using his abilities to further stockpile his toxic waste dump (I'm not sure why it takes *boxes* of different cyanide compounds to manufacture E.)
My own experience with lawyers many years ago was getting out of 5 nice speeding tickets in one year. $1055 for combined legal costs to maintain my perfect driving record. I would learn from my misdeads others would spend money to work the legal system for their vices. I feel ashamed for my experience, but I learned this is a true way of life for others.
Note the change in party loyalty (Score:5, Interesting)
As his power base has grown, and as he has become more entrenched and established, he has increasingly favored the Republicans. Of course, the decision of the Clinton white house to trustbust him can't have helped.
Re:what a load of crap (Score:1, Interesting)
Oh come on the stats are good, it's just that lots of firms have organized contributions in such a way to avoid such listings. MS being the new comer still has not fully got in the swing. Give em time and they will likely subvert such sites in the number of ways that remain. Chief amoung them getting the employees to donate to a "favourable choice" representative. Just think of all the voting blocks unions try to create then change that to dollars and you have the idea.
See the problem with covering these practices is the amount of computation necessary and the amount of data required is brutal compared to nice numbers like they cited.
This came up during HDTV standards debates (Score:4, Interesting)
The reason for this was that the broadcasters and the TV manufacturers and pretty much everyone else remotely interested in HDTV standards had tons of lobbyists working full time to push their interests, except for companies in the computer industry. A couple computer companies had a couple of part-time lobbyists working on this, or something pathetic like that.
Microsoft is not doing something bad here. The ones doing something bad are all the other companies that should be on that list but aren't.
Top recipient: Jay Inslee (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:corporate power is out of control (Score:1, Interesting)
read between the lines... (Score:2, Interesting)
prior to the swinging of the executive pendulum towards the republicans, more of their money went to democrats. but ( and it would be interesting to see what they gave in 97 and 99 ) when things took a turn for the worse publicly ( interns, cigars, cum-stained clothing ), more money goes to the republicans. i'd like to see what they did in 99, when everyone sort of just said fuck it, so what if he banged an intern? look at hillary... and got over it.
looking at the numbers, i'd say they were hedging their bets in 98-00, and then went w/ the winner when dubya got in. judging from the results of the case, i'd say it paid off.
Wow, and they still pale in comparison.... (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/ [opensecrets.org]
Blue Chip Investors
Top Donor Dossiers
Here you'll find total contributions for the 100 biggest givers in American politics since 1989--information that exists nowhere else. Read the full report. Read about our methodology.
* View top organizational givers by rank
* View top organizational givers by alphabetical order
* View top individual contributors from these organizations
Search for an organization by name:
Top 10 donors:
American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees $30,671,426
National Education Assn $21,116,383
National Assn of Realtors $20,414,385
Assn of Trial Lawyers of America $19,931,717
Philip Morris $18,951,671
Teamsters Union $18,858,733
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $18,394,547
American Medical Assn $18,377,814
Service Employees International Union $17,647,346
Communications Workers of America $17,597,372
Re:And the winner is... (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm surprized that anyone is the focus of this story. This is NO story. MS,and the other companies are executing their rights within the law to give money to political candidates. They are obviously reporting the results too, otherwise we wouldn't know the amounts. Get over it people, or do something about the preceived problem (like vote for decent candidates and monitor their activities and report to others what the senators/representatives/presidents are doing). Saying MS can't donate money is like those people that say Christians can't hold public office. Them's the rules folks. Live with them or change the constitution. Better yet, don't let your money get into Bill's hands and he won't have that amount to donate away!
Re:Under the table? (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't doubt that this kind of still happens to a limited degree, but I think the degree is very limited and has been for quite sometime. It simply isn't worth the risk of getting caught, and members of Congress know how easy it is to get caught accepting a gift like an expensive notebook or a car. I know an editor who persuaded the publishing company he works for to send complimentary copies of a newly published book to every senator. (The subject of the book pertained to legislation pending in Congress.) Almost all the books were returned with gracious letters thanking the editor for his interest, but explaining that the publisher's price for the book exceeded the amount Congresspeople are allowed to accept as gifts. Many expressed support for the position taken by the book's author (which was well-known and obvious from the book's title), some said they were interested in the author's arguments and would purchase a copy (probably a tax write-off anyway!), most had no comments one way or the other.
There are plenty of perfectly legitimate ways for Congresspeople to get perks without accepting under-the-table gifts.
Michael
No, government power is out of control (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a myth that the US government holds back the corporations and forces them to play fair. For at least a hundred years it has done the opposite. The only times it every does anything right is when some wealthy person or group pays it to.
Unfortunately, there is no graceful way to change this situation. Try to change the government and the corporations work against us. Try to change the corporations and the government works against us. It will come to a head this century.
Re:Contributions should be illegal (Score:3, Interesting)
I had a Spanish teacher in High School who didn't teach jack. He would spend most of the class period asking the students "trivia" questions for extra points. Maybe once or twice a week we would crack open the Spanish book and attempt to learn something. There were hardly any homework assignments or tests at all in the class.
Yet, very few students complained because he gave almost everyone in the class a free grade of "A." The only students who complained were the one or two people who actually wanted to learn something.
When I privately asked an administrator if they knew what was happening in the class, they said they did. When I asked why they didn't fire the bum for not teaching what he was being paid to teach (or at least get on his case), they replied they couldn't because of some nonsense with the teacher's union and "tenure."
Seriously, it seems like something really warped is going on in schools, and I wouldn't put it past all the teacher's union "contributions" that are often made against the will of many teachers themselves to state and federal legislatures.
And in response... (Score:5, Interesting)
One way to respond to this is with Volunteer time:.
If you presume that volunteer time is worth $10/Hr, and a (reasonably high) 32 hours/ person (4 hours/week over 8 weeks). that means that it would take about 10,000 people volunteering on these terms to outbid Microsoft's 'donations'.
If you want to make the biggest impact with this, you may be best to gather together a couple dozen (or even a couple hundred) of your best friends and go in force to your local candidate's office. Tell them how many people you have at your service, and tell them that you'd like to know where the candidate would stand on issues important to you and that you're giving your time to the candidat who best supports your interests.
This is non trivial: 10 people, 30 hours each, $10+/hour is the equivilalent of a $3000 donation. More if you're doing more than grunt work (e.g. doing computer support). The real truth of the matter is that good volunteers can be worth their money in gold.
Part of the value of going in as a group is that you can probably volunteer together. It can be a great social activity. Be aware, however, that part of the value of volunteer time is that it is a wonderful way to meet other people. I've made some great friends and gotten some interesting contacts by doing political work.
Re:Contributions should be illegal (Score:1, Interesting)
Both soft-money and hard-money contributions to either political party should be flat-out illegal.
So you support repeal of the First Amendment?
Michael
Re:Sadly its a rational move for MS (Score:4, Interesting)
They did lobby and won most battles, just not all.. The side effect was for our economy to gear up for a very deep cleansing cycle. We call it the great depression.
Capitalism in a democracy (or republic) can operate with only so much overhead (corruption) and then it cleanses itself. This happens every sixty years or so. The greater the corruption, the deeper the recession/depression. Every single MSFT or AOL or PMs lobbying successes equals a larger failure country wide. Eventually (any remotely) economic law will be total spegetti code and we will need an FDR to fix it.
Lets hope the voting public realises this before they vote/relect any candidate without strict views on campain finance. Soft money may be gone after this election, but the election process is far from fair.
Other major corporate donors (Score:5, Interesting)
5 Philip Morris $18,951,671
12 AT&T $17,464,374
18 Citigroup Inc $14,762,646
19 United Parcel Service $14,621,284
21 Goldman Sachs $13,665,527
26 AOL Time Warner $12,195,822
28 FedEx Corp $11,555,286
29 BellSouth Corp $10,838,209
30 SBC Communications $10,695,349
31 Verizon Communications $10,255,052
33 RJR Nabisco/RJ Reynolds Tobacco $10,079,162
34 Ernst & Young $9,967,638
35 Lockheed Martin $9,862,899
36 JP Morgan Chase & Co $9,861,326
40 Microsoft Corp $9,468,287
No, the open-source community needs a party (Score:3, Interesting)
In fact, the Green Party is the only one that thinks corporate power is a problem. And we are the only party whose values line up with the open-source commuity. See for yourself at http://www.greenpartyus.org/
Re:Where the power lies. (Score:3, Interesting)
- The tobacco companies got hit with a
- Ken Lay should probably not be planning any trips out of the country soon, because the heat isn't off. Neither, for that matter, should Bernie Ebbers, who has gotten to see executive after executive cooperate with authorities to save their own skins.
When was the last time a government department went bankrupt and had to fold due to chronic inefficiency? When was the last time a high-ranking civil servant was sacked due to incompetence or malfeasance -- keeping in mind that both Reagan and Clinton served a full eight years despite their questionable records? How many companies could basically ignore the need to have a budget, or survive that long with bozos who care more about popularity than efficacy?
Re:read between the lines... (Score:3, Interesting)
Gates absolutely hated Clinton. A good friend of ours (went to the dark side for many $$'s at M$) was at a party at Gates house where Gates went on an absolute tirade against Clinton almost to the point of breaking down in tears before leaving the room. Our friend tells us it was really spooky and kinda sad, but it was most certain where Bill Gates political bent was focused. Shortly after hearing about this, I was watching CSPAN where dubya was coming out against the M$ anti-trust trial. And we all know the history since...Dubya gets in courtesy of the supreme court, appoints Ashcroft and gets rid of the entire Microsoft anti-trust legal team.
Re:Gun-/Human rights (Score:3, Interesting)
Take a look around you. Are they identical to each other in capabilities, when it comes to handling themselves with regards to violence? Probably not -- both physically (some people are larger, faster, stronger than others) and mentally (ability to take in a tactical situation, ruthlessness to follow through if need be). Even if you assume a "fair" situation, the playing field of crime is biased towards an attacker...
An attacker can bring partners and choose his victims, within reason -- there's not much point in trying to carjack pedestrians, for instance, so if he really wants a car, that slightly limits things. But say that a man wants sex, and is a sufficient asshole that he'd rather take it than earn it or pay for it. In that case, he can pick where he operates (e.g. areas with cover where he can hide), when (probably when there are minimal witnesses), and on whom (pref. a woman alone, one smaller and likely much weaker physically). Would you say it's a coin-toss, or would you say that the attacker has an edge? I'd say the latter -- while he may not be bright enough to avoid leaving evidence, that's of little consolation to the victim.
Even for a mugging, weapons aren't needed -- say, three-on-one. Two approach from behind, the third punches in the kidneys or chops at the back of the neck, follow up with groin kneestrike from the front. Even if the victim fights back -- without a weapon, as you would seem to prefer -- the attackers might expect at most a bruise or two, given the ratio, plus the victim's money and other valuables. A lethal firearm equalizes things a bit given that many thugs won't be amenable to taking a bullet (instead of a punch that can be recovered from MUCH more readily) just so his partners can split $40.
Incidentally, in Pittsburgh a serial sex offender was recently caught -- after eight or so victims. He wasn't caught by police footwork -- he was only stopped after he attacked the wrong civillian, twice in one day (the first time, she got away... and went home and retrieved her pistol). Tell the final "victim" that she shouldn't have had a gun.
OT: Noelle Bush was caught with crack! (Score:4, Interesting)
Given that Ms. Bush has a long history of drug abuse, it's astonishing that the matter wasn't pursued further. Except for her family connections. Further proof that if you're rich or powerful criminal law simply doesn't apply.
--M
Re:Interesting... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't understand what you find wrong with doing what you did. You spent $1055 to save yourself untold thousands of dollars in artificially inflated insurance fees over the next several years after your tickets. Is it then not worthwhile to use the system as it was designed -- you're innocent until proven guilty, and if your lawyer is good enough, they can't prove you guilty. Considering speeding tickets are designed mainly as a source of income for the government, I have absolutely no problem whatsoever fighting those tickets. (many speeding tickets are issued when there's no "unsafe driving" happening other than maybe a bit of excess speed -- why not ticket the people trying to read the morning paper or put on their makeup during their commute?) I pay more than enough in taxes, so why should I also pay for speeding tickets, and the increase in insurance rates (which goes towards buying radar and laser speed detection equipment for law enforcement agencies, to increase the number of speeding tickets issued, to increase the insurance premiums, to buy more equipment, etc)?
People joke about lawyers being scum, and just out to get your money, and just generally being a bad sort of person. However, I for one would not like to live in a world without lawyers. When the government can trump up anything to get you to pay up (oh no! I was going some arbitrary speed higher than some arbitrarily set speed limit, on a road that can handle some speed higher than what I was going, in a car that can handle the same, with no traffic around me at all!), I consider lawyers the last line of defense between me and the money-grubbing politicians.
Re:american democracy? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:And the winner is... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:corporate power is out of control (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:american democracy? (Score:2, Interesting)
Each candidate is alloted equal amount of time on the television and they use it to promote their cause. Similar things with other media etc.
The basic idea is, the government ensures that all candidates are given equal exposure.
In USA, if someone's program appeals to more people but the candidate doesn't have enough money to tell everyone about it, then the jerk with a big purse wins because people will think there is no alternative.
Re:corporate power is out of control (Score:3, Interesting)
Here is a free clue for you: what "capitalist" society (as you put it) is a multi-national corporation a member of?
I honestly think the founding fathers would roll in their graves if they could hear their decendants
Re:No, government power is out of control (Score:2, Interesting)
Obviously, you've never heard of the Pinkertons [pinkertons.com].
Re:So where's the report on KPCB? (Score:2, Interesting)