| Site
Highlights: XML/RSS
Feed
Content update action
Site Search
Powered by Google
News
Archives
Organized by month
Latest
Schnazz
Newly-found links
FCC
Watch
-Enforcement
Database
-FCC Features
Media
Collage
-Truthful
Translations
-Celebrity Speech
-Consumer Collage
A/V
Library
-Featured MP3s
-Misc. Goodness Features
Index
-Digital Radio Articles
-Microradio in the U.S.
-General Pirate Radio
-LPFM Archives
Links
Directory
1,000s and growing!
Mbanna Kantako
-News/Commentary
-Music
Buy Me A Book!
|
Page 1,
2, 3,
4, 5
Vote Breakdown / Money's Influence
Of
the 274 votes in favor of the anti-LPFM bill, 188 were cast by Republicans,
85 were Democrats, and one independent Representative supported it. Support
for the bill came from every state except Vermont.
Of the 110 votes against the anti-LPFM
bill, 106 were cast by Democrats, 3 by Republicans, and one by an independent.
Surprisingly enough, close to half of
the 50 that didn't cast votes on H.R. 3439 had signed on as original cosponsors.
If the President were to veto the bill, those "extra" potential
votes necessary for an override in the House are there. This turns the
Senate into the next definite battleground.
The passage of the "Radio Broadcasting
Preservation Act" also was a typical case study of the corrupting
influence of money on politics (I worked out the math using data from
Opensecrets.org):
- The National Association of Broadcasters'
political action committee has paid out, according to the most recently
available campaign finance reports for the 1999-2000 election cycle,
$163,996.
- That is about 55% of the money it spent
on House members in the 1997-98 election cycle - but we're still months
away from November. And, doubtless, there's some thank-you checks
going in the mail today.
- Of the NAB money spent so far on Congress
this cycle, $130,750 has been on House Republicans, while $33,246
has been spent on House Democrats. This is just about a 4-to-1 advantage
for Republican lawmakers, even though they only control the House by
about a 10-vote majority.
- Specifically looking at the "Radio
Broadcasting Preservation Act" itself and those who voted for it,
the NAB spent $117,998 of its campaign bribery so far this election
cycle directly on 62 of the votes in favor of the bill. This works out
to $1,903 paid per vote.
- However, because 274 Representatives
ended up voting "aye," the NAB's "price per vote"
drops to $430! What a bargain!
- Some of those who cast "no"
votes on the Act also got NAB donations this year or last. 12 Representatives
who voted against the anti-LPFM bill still collected $14,498
(or $1,208 average) from the NAB.
- Even some of those who didn't vote
on the bill collected $31,000. Most of that money went to those
"extra" votes the NAB can call on for a vote if a presidential
veto override is necessary.
- Even more interesting is the fact that
of the close to two dozen Representatives who rose to speak on the House
Floor about the anti-LPFM bill, 11 of them were recipients of NAB cash,
averaging around $3,000 per speech (not bad for about 10 minutes'
work each).
Unfortunately, the voice with money triumphs
over the voices without it. It's the way business gets done in Congress.
Next Page --> Lies,
Ignorance and Rhetoric: In Their Own Words -->
Page 1, 2,
3, 4,
5
|
