A Look At Joe Biden's Tech Voting Record 603
Aviran brings us an analysis of Democratic Vice Presidential candidate Joe Biden's voting record on technology issues. CNet breaks down the issues by category and provides details on the tech-related legislation he's introduced in the past several years. Biden received a score of 37.5% on CNet's 2006 technology voter guide. We've discussed the technology stances of McCain and Obama in the past.
Why... (Score:5, Informative)
Why did Biden vote against the FISA bill, the one where Obama voted for? You know, the one that granted telecoms immunity against criminal prosecution.
Re:Change (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I wonder what the FBI has on him. (Score:5, Informative)
No, as President of the Senate he will always vote the way the Obama Administration wants him to - this is how all Vice Presidents have voted in the past.
Re:You never know, with Joe (Score:1, Informative)
"Joe Biden has strong anti-piracy record" (Score:5, Informative)
I guess we'd better hope voting records don't mean much, as it seems Biden is a firm friend of the *AA's
NEW YORK -- Joe Biden may have made his name in foreign relations in 32 years in the Senate, but his efforts against piracy have won him respect in Hollywood.
Biden was named Saturday as Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's running mate. The Delaware senator has got a long list of credentials, including chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, membership on the Senate Judiciary Committee and experience on the world stage lacking in the top of the ticket. But the 64-year-old Scranton, Pa., native has been a strong advocate for U.S. intellectual property rights and an ardent soldier in the fight against piracy.
As a founding member of the Congressional International Anti-Piracy Caucus, Biden has helped the lead the fight against countries such as China, Russia, Mexico and India that need stronger copyright protections.
"When somebody holds you up on the street and takes your wallet, we call it robbery," Biden said in May 2007. "And when somebody steals your idea and creation, we call it theft, plain and simple." The MPA has lauded the work of the anti-piracy caucus as being essential to motivating the government to action.
(From http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i67f2ad037eba0dd6e4821ce39ce827a3?imw=Y [hollywoodreporter.com])
All of them voted for (Score:5, Informative)
All of them voted for the I-CAN-SPAM Act, except Obama. Obama didn't vote for the I-CAN-SPAM Act because he was not there to vote for it.
Biden Voted Against FISA Amnesty (Score:5, Informative)
When FISA came to a vote as HR.6308 [senate.gov] on July 9, 2008, Biden voted against it, Obama voted for it.
Re:Why I never trust "voting records" (Score:4, Informative)
How can you profess to be impartial when you use loaded language like that? Government intervention in markets is a good thing unless you like all your telephones rented from AT&T, or antifreeze in your toothpaste.
You're dead-on about lobbying groups, however. Most of them are corporate shills. Then again, consider the EFF.
Re:You never know, with Joe (Score:3, Informative)
If Obama wins then ... (Score:3, Informative)
... that makes Biden [wikipedia.org] the President of the Senate [wikipedia.org]. So if there is a tie in the Senate [wikipedia.org], he gets to break the tie [wikipedia.org], as Cheney [wikipedia.org] has done 8 times so far. What we need is enough pro-technology senators to ensure this doesn't happen. Still, he will be able to do a lot of damage with his powers to control the agenda. So what Obama [wikipedia.org] needs to do is keep him busy on foreign affairs trips, sending him overseas, to keep him away from the Senate so the President pro tempore [wikipedia.org] can take control.
Re:My thoughts on US politics right now (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Wrong (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Change (Score:3, Informative)
Too bad McCain's idea of middle class is 3 million a year.
Re:My thoughts on US politics right now (Score:2, Informative)
We use instant runoff elections in Australia (though we call it "preferential voting"). It basically works like a process of elimination - no candidate wins until they have more than 50% of the vote.
IMO, it is a lot better at letting people vote their true intentions. However, there are two problems with its implementation in Australia, which seem to counter its advantages:
1) We have compulsory voting. We all have to turn up to the voting booth and get our name crossed off, or we get fined!
2) You have to number all the boxes on the electoral sheet - you can't just vote for say, your top 3 candidates, and then have your vote extinguish (admittedly, this would the instant runoff calculations more complex, but there's no reason for this requirement).
You don't know the history of the bill, then (Score:3, Informative)
The history of that bill is otherwise. While the vote was a lopsided 68/29/3 (y/n/not-voting), one must remember that it was filibustered, and overcoming a filibuster takes a 3/5 super-majority (on the US Senate base of 100), so the margin was more like 8 votes than 18, and wasn't a sure thing at all. It had previously failed, and the supporters had to "deal" in ordered to get the votes they needed. One wonders what deal Obama cut in ordered to get him to change is vote after an original pledge to oppose it if it included telecom immunity.
By contrast, as one of the drafters of the original FISA this bill was updating, Biden was opposed to the bill with the telecom immunity provision from the beginning, and remained so. He pointed out that McCain's (and Obama's as well, after he switched, tho that wasn't pointed out) position on this put him in the company of both Bush and Nixon in taking the position that the President is above the law. Further, he quoted himself from the original FISA debate in 1978, "it is not necessary to compromise civil liberties in the name of national security", saying that's as true today, in a time of war, as it was then, and calling the bill including the telecom immunity provision "a false choice -- national security or civil liberties."
While Biden's record on civil liberties isn't perfect (while he voted to extend PATRIOT in 2005, bad for civil liberties, he did at least vote against reauthorizing its wiretap provision in 2006, and he sponsored legislation that unfortunately died in committee that would have banned torture and interrogation techniques not authorized by the US Army Field Manual, which is pretty reasonable), it's actually more good than bad, better than most, unfortunately.
See this article at the Daily Kos, from which I borrowed somewhat liberally for the above, for more: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/23/112722/071 [dailykos.com]
I'm on record as hoping Obama might either reverse himself or satisfactorily explain himself on this, so I could again support him. I had been as close as I'd ever been to donating to his campaign, before this, but that vote ended all thought of that, and I was seriously looking into third party candidates and even considering for the first time since I could vote, just saying home for this presidential election, as I couldn't vote for McCain, Obama wasn't leaving me reason to vote FOR him (as opposed to against McCain) either (tho as I posted in response to someone else on another story, I'd have probably voted third party, likely Barr, because altho I don't agree with much of that platform, it'd shake up Washington and the still dominant two parties would have killed anything too radical, at least the first term... and because I take voting as a duty and would have felt guilty not voting... but writing in none-of-the-above as a protest would have been an option as well). While I don't believe Biden was chosen primarily for his position on this, the choice /does/ start the process, or at least signal that it might happen. I'm still not all that hopeful, but it's possible, and at least I have the option of voting Obama/Biden now, where before it was beginning to look like my only options would be third party or a none-of-the-above write-in.
We'll see.
Re:My thoughts on US politics right now (Score:3, Informative)
Apparently, you have enough money to afford luxuries like a computer and an internet connection....
Or access to a public library.
Re:Reagan and Clinton were both successful leaders (Score:2, Informative)
That's not much compared to Bill Clinton:
You've got that backwards. Being a Yale graduate is not much compared to being the head of the Harvard Law Review.
What's Obama done in comparison to -that-? Nothing, really. I mean, he becomes a state legislature, and blah blah blah blah
How to Market Obama to Your Republican Friends [dailykos.com]. A Republican lays out reasons why Republicans should vote for Obama, and cites issues like Obama working to secure loose nukes in the former U.S.S.R., brought major transparency with The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, and more. Try reading it, but feel free to keep spouting your cute little theories. I enjoy playing Jerry to your George Castanza.