How much does it cost to buy a vote in the national legislature that could potentially save your business billions of dollars in legal liability for you willfull, illegal actions over a period of several years? Well, it varies depending on the legislator, but for Verizon, Sprint, and AT&T to get retroactive immunity for their role in placing what amounts to millions of unwarranted wiretaps on United States citizens it averaged $9,659 each.
That was how much, on average, a Democrat that voted against the March 14th immunity but turned around to support the June 20th immunity received from political action committees run by these telcos. To be fair, the 129 U.S. representatives that voted against immunity averaged $4,180 in contributions each since the beginning of the year, but that five grand apparently represents the value of your privacy, citizen.
Take a look for yourself. How much did you rep cost? Nancy Pelosi costs about $24,000 to win over. John Murtha of Pennsylvania (former contender for the majority leader position) came in cheap at a mere $5,000. Wonder how that is.
Please note that these numbers are just the campaign contributions, and does not reflect other money spent on lobbyists. There’s a slim chance that the Senate won’t just turn around and show their ass on this. Again. Where do your representative and senators stand?
Thanks for pointing this stuff out, sometimes I wonder how many people think it is any other way.
Looks like Obama’s gone over to the dark side on this one, stating in a press conference yesterday that he agrees with the “compromise” version of the telco immunity. I don’t see what the phone companies gave up that makes this a compromise. They have to show that they got a request for the information? Did we think that they just gave it up spontaneously? Are we to expect that some kind of criminal investigation will follow using these requests as evidence. Damn it.
I will disagree on this one and your previous related post (disclaimer: I work for a phone company). If you were sitting at home and government agents would show up at your house armed and ask you to violate every amendment while they are standing there threatening to anally rape you and your family, you would probably eventually comply. now translate this into a bigger picture: after 9/11 and all the terrorist hype these people (holding hostage billions in government contracts) order the phone companies to do what they want. the telco complies. telco should not be put in the position of being a protector of the constituion just like wal-mart or any other business. they were after all ordered by a legit government agency. so the responsibility is with the government which is also repsonsible now for not making telcos financially responsible for the bad policy/orders/decisions. if telcos were found liable it would have done nothing for future violations of the constitution by the government, the only result would be some law firm getting paid. telcos would pass costs to the customer, maybe fire a guy or two. i find this decision appropriate.
@Meesha: NSA program started before September of 2001. The 9/11 justification is B.S. Furthermore, nobody was pointing a gun at the telco reps, they got a letter. A letter that Qwest got also, but they did the right things and said “hey, we’ll be happy to help if you can get us a warrant.” Frankly, the people directly responsible for complying with these illegal searches (at the telco and in the government) need some quality time in the klink.
It occurs to me that a link supporting that “NSA program started before September of 2001” statement may be useful for general credibility. I’m not a tin-foil-hat nutcase, honest.
Former CEO Says U.S. Punished Phone Firm
withholding contracts=blackmail for a corporation;finger is still pointing to the government because the government is serving people and corporation does not.
Oh, I agree that the government misbehaved by asking these telcos to break the law. That does not clean the telcos’ hands. I certainly think that testifying against the government agencies may be worth extending immunity to the telco employees for their personal culpability (applied in a real-world, narrow sense as opposed to TV drama immunity).
The only way to reliably deter bad behavior by a corporation (an inherently amoral legal entity created to cultivate wealth for its owners) is to make it financially detrimental to pursue such behavior. If a company can get better government contract and experience no measurable negative repercussions for breaking the law, that company will break that law. That corporation must break that law or violate its very purpose for existence, the fiduciary interest of the stockholders. If violating the law diminishes the profits of the corporation more than it enriches its shareholders, it much obey that law. This is simple carrot-and-stick stuff. This is the fundamental justification for business regulation (beyond simple contract enforcement): to allow corporations to do the right thing when it would otherwise be unprofitable.
They misbehaved, they deserve the stick. If they didn’t misbehave, they can win in court. Examples need to be made.
I’m with Burrorowl on this one.
It may not be the job of the telcos to enforce the law, but it is their job uphold it, regardless of what administration tells them. The “He ordered me to do it” defense hasn’t worked since Germany, 1946 and the fact that it seem to be getting pulled out a lot these days here at home scares the hell out of me.
It quickly degrades into circular reasoning.
I did it, because they told me to do it, because I can, because they told me I can. It’s crap and it’s illegal. It’s also the exact, polar opposite to what the founders of our country had in mind when they wrote the Dear John letter to Charles II.
“Of the People, For the People and By the People” is just about dead and this “compromise” was another nail in our collective coffin.
Up next, government cameras in you home! You know… because we need to keep tabs on you. By the way, we have a couple of soldiers that you’re going to have to put up in the guest room. It’s for the war effort. What to you mean “Bill of Rights’?!? What are you, a disloyal American? That’s just like supporting the terrorists! See what happens when you try to get on a plane now, buddy!
Turkish Prawn
@Turkish Prawn: Godwin’s Law. We can have reasonable discussions about the merits and flaws of the current regime without alluding to Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. Considering Meesha’s background, a discussion of privacy issues and governmental abuse of power should involve the KGB and Stalinism. That way he can better inform us of what those things were actually like to live around through a witty rebuttal.
“Freedom is something you assume. Then you wait for someone to try to take it away from you. The degree to which you resist is the degree to which you are free.” I get touchy about my civil liberties sometimes.
It has nothing to do with issues,KGB or Hitler. Corporation is out there to legally screw people in the interest of the shareholders. Even Karl Marx wrote about it long time ago. Government is charged with responsibility to protect it’s citizens by creating and executing the law to minimize the pain of being screwed. Government failed. If it cared enough to rectify the situation it would create and/or correct existing law and then make sure it’s being followed. Suing corporation in court will not rectify anything and compensate potential victims who will not see any proceeds. Potential for repeat is still there. Here is another court decision where the court said that the Government should have protected the citizens instead of expecting the power companies to play nice. http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20080627-9999-1b27power.html