Google Leads Among Consumer Tech Companies Lobbying Congress 65
Nerval's Lobster writes "Google is still the tech company that spends most lavishly to make its influence known in Washington, D.C., according to a report analyzing the lobbying activity of technology firms. Using data from disclosure forms filed with the Clerk of the House of Representatives, the oversight group Consumer Watchdog added up the efforts of tech-company representatives to get in front of lawmakers and state their employers' case. Facebook's spending on lobbying rose 47 percent between 2012 and 2013, from $980,000 during the third quarter of 2012 to 1.4 million during 2013. Microsoft also boosted its spending by 20 percent, from $1.9 million in 2012 to $2.2 million during the third quarter of this year. Google cut its spending on lobbyists, but still spent $3.4 million during the third quarter – three times what Facebook spent during the same quarter. Apple's lobbying efforts shot up 111 percent between the third quarter of 2012 and 2013, but still amounted to only $970,000 this year. Cisco Systems spent $890,000; IBM spent $1.18 million; Intel spent $980,000 and Oracle spent $1.36 million. Though telecommunications firms are in a separate category, Google still outspent Verizon (down 2 percent, to $3.04 million) and Verizon Wireless (up 19 percent, to $1.2 million). It was trumped by AT&T (up 23 percent, to $4.3 million)."
Bribes (Score:4, Insightful)
And I thought bribes were illegal.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Wag the dog. Unseen brokers, consultants, and accountants that skim off money traveling both directions are who direct the action. Google leads the tech companies. Who spends the most overall?
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products...
Insurance...
Well... big surprise there.. Big year coming up for those dudes...
Spending your money on lobbying is perfectly fine, but fuck these politicians being a yes man to them. There's no extortion. Everybody's doing this crap by free choice with full 'consent of the governed'.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just congress. A company is 50% less likely to be prosecuted by the Justice Department if they make a donation to the DNC.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not just congress. A company is 50% less likely to be prosecuted by the Justice Department if they make a donation to the DNC.
Hence the need for the separation of Corporate and State. If corporations want the same rights as persons, then they should be goverened by the same rules equally. Yes, yes I know some believe themselves more equal than others. BOVINE SCAT!
Re: (Score:1)
They were.. but corporations bribed the congress to make it legal.
lobbying is bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
Lobbying should be outlawed, because it's doesn't fairly represent the people. Laws shouldn't be introduced or passed because a lot of money is throw at the law makers.
Problem is, if Google doesn't spend the money, then the other companies that are spending the money are going to be heard, not Google.
Bullshit system that needs to be outlawed.
Re: (Score:2)
Turns out congressmen prefer money over constituents.
Who knew?
What I want to know is if there was ever a time when duty trumped dollars.
Apple's lobbying efforts shot up 111 percent between the third quarter of 2012 and 2013, but still amounted to only $970,000 this year.
Looks like they better get back to their old pace 1990s before they get hauled back into Congress for actually paying some taxes. Ever notice that when one of these firms cuts back on the lobbying, they have to go see the principle live on C-SPAN?
The Waters Are Muddy (Score:4, Insightful)
While I agree with you, I can't blame these mega-corporations. Lawmakers have a tendency to pass laws that would crush private industries unless they intervened. My guess is that most of this money isn't spent trying to push some agenda, they're simply trying to protect their business from meddlesome lawmakers.
We'll need a government that doesn't screw with the private industry before the private industry agrees to stop screwing with the government.
Re: (Score:2)
Lawmakers have a tendency to pass laws that would crush private industries unless they intervened.
Which explains why, in the 1950's and 60's for example, when spending on lobbyists was a fraction of what it is today, the economy was destroyed by laws that crushed private industries. Or was it one of the biggest growth period in our country's history? I forget. Screw it - ideological assumptions trump facts.
Google is vulnerable to legislation ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Which explains why, in the 1950's and 60's for example, when spending on lobbyists was a fraction of what it is today, the economy was destroyed by laws that crushed private industries. Or was it one of the biggest growth period in our country's history? I forget. Screw it - ideological assumptions trump facts.
Those companies that you referred to generally made money by manufacturing products and selling them for a profit. That is not what Google does. It sells its hardware products at around cost (ex Nexus). It gives away its software (ex Android). It makes money off of services, in particular targeted advertising based on its monitoring of users (Search, Gmail, etc).
Google's business is **highly** vulnerable to potential legislation. Public sentiment is running a bit high against corporate (and gov't) "snooping" on individuals. Any restrictions on how a company can monitor or collect information on consumers could be quite harmful to Google's revenue. It makes great business sense to be in DC to head off or steer such "privacy" legislation in a manner that preserves Google's ability to monitor users.
Re: (Score:2)
tl;dr productive businesses are less vulnerable to reasonable legislation.
Couldn't agree more.
Re: (Score:3)
Ping.
Reply: I don't agree with you on any of your points, I think even in principle. You could be mistaken, I could be mistaken or you could be a very elegant troll. Regardless here is my reply.
Lawmakers passed anti-monopoly laws without lobbyists. Lobbyists always spend money pushing an agenda, that's the definition of a lobbyist: They are trying to get lawmakers to meddle to protect their business. A government that doesn't screw with the priva
Re: (Score:2)
Lawmakers have a tendency to pass laws that would crush private industries unless they intervened.
Can you give some examples? And remember, we're talking Federal government here, not state or local. And if your examples include keeping food products safe, the environment clean, ensuring a safe workplace, etc, I say tough shit. If you can't obey the law and stay in business, you're in the wrong damned business.
Re:lobbying is bullshit (Score:5, Interesting)
Bullshit system that needs to be outlawed.
Do your part: http://www.wolf-pac.com/ [wolf-pac.com]
Re:lobbying is bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
Lobbying should be outlawed, because it's doesn't fairly represent the people. Laws shouldn't be introduced or passed because a lot of money is throw at the law makers.
Problem is, if Google doesn't spend the money, then the other companies that are spending the money are going to be heard, not Google.
Bullshit system that needs to be outlawed.
Then you need to have a Constitution adjustment, since it is more properly called a redress of grievances. What we as citizens need to do is hold those elected responsible for just how they address the redress.
Re: (Score:3)
Problem is, if Google doesn't spend the money, then the other companies that are spending the money are going to be heard, not Google.
Exactly. One of the big things to come out of the fight against SOPA was the realization that Silicon Valley needed to step up the lobbying if they were going to avoid being stepped on by Hollywood's lobbying.
Re: (Score:3)
Will never happen. The gravy train has too much momentum to stop. Too many US politicians are so corrupt and hard-headed that America will never get something passed like Canada's Federal Accountability Act, which bans any amount of lobbying that could affect the political process.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Think of how much worse things would end up under libertarianism, which starts with a strong power vacuum.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's like lawyers: there are bad corrupt ones AND good ones who are necessary. The bad ones give them all a bad name, but they are critical. Not all are the high-powered meet and schmooze and blackmail and funnel bri
Re: (Score:2)
Or you dilute lobbying power. Bring back the 1-in-30,000 rule. Don't worry about fat pay - pay 'em based on the mean, median or mode of the area they represent. And modern technology mea
Re: (Score:2)
> Lobbying should be outlawed, because it's doesn't fairly represent the people
Oh silly, young little one.
The purpose of power is to get yourself in the way of people who want to get business done, so they will pay you to get back out of the way.
"For the people" is fraudulent hot air designed, meme-style, to get you behind those who seize power, so they can get in the way of your businessmen betters, to get the businessmen to pay them to get back out of the way.
This parsimonious explanation needs no addi
Facebook's constribution is misleading - (Score:1)
Lest we forget, Zuckerberg started his own PAC - Forward.us which I'm sure does no lobbying that would benefit Facebook... like increasing the number of H1Bs...
I wonder... (Score:3, Interesting)
Consumer Watchdog = Microsoft (Score:2)
It has been very well established that Microsoft is the "man behind the curtain" of several organizations that lobby congress. In fact, Consumer Watchdog may be another MS puppet.
In Defense of Google, Or Why Consumer Watchdog is Full of It
http://www.wired.com/business/2010/09/in-defense-of-google/
Re:I wonder... (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow.... Googles lobbying even reach here
Don't be Evil? (Score:3)
Don't Buy Evil (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Evil really depends on what they are paying for now doesn't it?
Are they paying to try and keep the internet open so their market place is still open (IE Net Neutrality) and only paying to counteract those paying to close it down or are they paying for something equally fucked up.
Remember, they are still stuck using the system they are in, no matter how fucked up it is, and if they don't play by the rules till they change, they lose.
Re: (Score:1)
>Remember when that was the Google mantra?
And if that lobbying is against the NSA and their intrusive programs???
Re: (Score:2)
Remember when that was the Google mantra? Are they still trying or have they been worn down by the system?
No, it's all a state of mind. With that motto, by definition all things Google does aren't evil, of course.
crowded-sourced counter-lobbying (Score:3)
Why don't we start a counter-lobbying service, that is funded by the crowd?
Something like kickstarter, but for lobbying.
Kickstarter (Score:5, Interesting)
I know this is a a bash Google article *sigh* (personally I quite shocked at how cheap Apple is...maybe not), but is anyone really shocked at how small the amounts are. Ignoring the fact that these amounts are peanuts to these companies; a few million protecting literally trillions in cash!? These amounts are smaller than many kickstarters. How about a kickstarter lobby congress for real tax laws, buy local hardware in government institutions, hell its cheap enough to have a open source or even better open standards mandated. I am going to stop there as mind is suddenly filling itself with ideas both ridiculous and nefarious. no pants fridays...and nuke france.
Re: (Score:2)
If you start that project, you have my support.
The problem, however, is that you are lobbying publicly, and if it gets big enough, surely the press will be watching too. So nobody in congress would be able to actually accept your dollars. In fact, I suspect that those people will even be driven to the "other side".
Re: (Score:2)
1. These aren't one-off payments;
2. This is just the amount declared;
3. Remember that executive salaries are so high because golfing buddies sit on each others' boards and set their wages. It's not about what you do but who you golf with;
4. If you really want to start this arms race, you'll lose.
Don't play the game - change the rules.
Scaled please? (Score:5, Interesting)
How about some results scaled by sales or by total assets? Google is big, so should spend the most.
Re:Scaled please? (Score:5, Informative)
Company, Market Cap (B), 3Qtr spending (M), Lobby Ratio
Google, $344.65 $3.40, 0.00099%
Facebook, $126.39, $1.40, 0.00111%
Microsoft, $282.26, $2.20, 0.00078%
Apple, $476.92, $0.97, 0.00020%
Cisco, $119.83, $0.89, 0.00074%
IBM, $192.54, $1.18, 0.00061%
Intel, $118.22, $0.98, 0.00083%
Oracle, $151.92, $1.36, 0.00090%
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you. Market cap may not be a perfect deflator as it ignores debt (important for banks & utilities) but is 'way better than no size deflator.
Consumer tech? (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh that's good news (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Timeline of the anti-trust case: [wired.com]
"May 18, 1998: The big day. The U.S. Justice Department and 20 state attorneys general file an antitrust suit against Microsoft, charging the company with abusing its market power to thwart competition, including Netscape.
September 6, 2001: U.S. Justice Department says it no longer seeks the breakup of Microsoft and wants to find a quick remedy in the antitrust case. "
Timeline of Microsoft political donations. [opensecrets.org]
If money is speech... (Score:2)
Both of you bleed red. But you're the one who gets sent to the front.
OpenSecrets.org - See who's giving & who's getting. [opensecrets.org]
To make its influence known... (Score:2)
Google Leads .. Lobbying congress (Score:2)