The Washington lobbying scandal involving Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon has the potential to be the biggest congressional scandal in modern times. At the core of this scandal was the use by Abramoff and Scanlon of campaign contributions, including soft money, and other financial favors to buy influence with members of Congress [...]
This is a time when the House should be acting on legislation to respond to the campaign finance, lobbying and ethics scandals facing the Congress and the nation.
And of course, that legislation means shutting down the internet as a First Amendment zone, accessible to all on an equal footing, whether it's your Aunt Ethel or Jack Abramoff or Haliburton.
But this got me thinking -- is Fred really that concerned about using unregulated money to buy influence in Congress?
Because last time I checked, his letter to every congressperson was an effort to influence Congress. And his organization, Democracy 21, is well financed by unknown interests (organizations and foundations whose donors are not public). So it seems that Fred himself is funded by those seeking to "buy influence with members of Congress"? By his own words, Fred is corrupt and akin to Abramoff. Hence, we should pass legislation that would stiffle Fred's ability to influence members of Congress.
Indeed, Fred set up a war room inside Rep. Meehan's office to help defeat H.R. 1606, which would've ensure a free and unfettered blogosphere. You fund Democracy 21, you're buying yourself some serious influence in Congress.
Yet for an organization that is obsessed with stiffling Free Speech lest it potentially, sometime in the future, open up the potential of a corporate-funded BLOG (one of 20 million or so), Democracy 21 is sure quiet about its donors on its website. Not a single reference to its donors, nor links to its filings.
Seems kind of hypocritical to me.
That, and he's afraid of free and unfettered free speech.