[Peace-discuss] Color of Change holds Bobby Rush accountable on net neutrality

[Robert Naiman]

http://my.firedoglake.com/jamesrucker/2011/01/26/accountability-who-else-will-go-the-way-of-congressman-bobby-rush/

Accountability: Who Else Will Go the Way of Congressman Bobby Rush?

By: James Rucker Wednesday January 26, 2011 12:44 pm

No member of Congress is beyond reproach. Every member of Congress
should be open scrutiny of their record, and every member should be
judged by his or her record. It’s critical to an effective democracy.

Last week, Congressman Bobby Rush’s record of carrying water for big
telecom corporations — at the expense of the communities he represents
— came back to haunt him when he lost his bid to become Ranking Member
of the subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet.
Rep. Rush had been almost certain to get the position until more than
16,000 ColorOfChange.org members opposed his candidacy because of his
record of advocating against net neutrality.

Now, Congressman Rush is trying to change the subject. But it won’t
work — not now, at a time when a politician’s statements and voting
record are readily available for the public to see and evaluate.

Corporate money has a huge influence over politicians and the policy
they make — and it’s a major problem for our democracy. Black
politicians are no exception. For years, corporate interests have
carefully sought support and loyalty from Black leaders with carefully
targeted donations to campaign committees and non-profit
organizations. The blessing of Black politicians and organizations can
— and too often does — give corporate America the cover they need to
ruthlessly pursue their interests at the expense of ours.

We started ColorOfChange.org to make government more accountable to
the interests of African-Americans. But we will only get so far if we
have a double standard for that accountability — one for Black
politicians and another for everyone else. The truth is that on
certain key issues, there are a significant number of Black leaders
and organizations that are beholden to corporate interests, and act
against their constituents’ interests because of it. To give anyone a
pass on those issues, even if they have been great on many others,
would only weaken our efforts.

Earlier this week, Rep. Rush attacked ColorOfChange.org with a
circular argument that said we are undermining Black interests by
challenging him. But he has never addressed the substance of our
opposition to his now-failed candidacy to be the Ranking Member of the
subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet: his
vocal opposition to net neutrality.

Instead, in his blog post on Monday, Rep. Rush tried to make this
story about Bobby Rush vs. James Rucker — ignoring the 16,000
ColorOfChange.org members who questioned Rep. Rush’s fitness for a
particular job. He repeated his accusation that ColorOfChange.org is
“beholden to Silicon Valley” without presenting a shred of evidence,
ignoring our campaign against Google for their actions against net
neutrality. He continued to dismiss net neutrality as unimportant
(without once mentioning it) by saying that he will remain focused on
addressing “real issues of concern to African American online users.”

But net neutrality is an issue of vital concern to African-Americans.
Our ability to compete on a level playing field and have our voices
heard on the Internet is unmatched in any other media platform — and
it is under dire threat if the big telecom companies get their way and
do away with net neutrality. Rep. Rush wants a pass on this issue, but
we can’t give it to him, even if he has been a strong advocate for
Black people on many other issues. With their new majority,
Republicans will do everything they can to destroy net neutrality, and
we can’t afford to give a powerful position with authority over this
issue to someone who will help them do it.

It bears repeating why our members were so vocal in their opposition
to Rush leading Democrats on the subcommittee which represents the
first line of defense against Republican attacks on net neutrality.
Rush has repeatedly taken donations from large telecom companies — and
his record on net neutrality seems to reflect that relationship. From
my blog post last week (to which Rush responded this week):

In 2006, Rush voted against Rep. Edward Markey’s amendment to the COPE
Act, which would have enshrined the FCC’s net neutrality principles
into law. In stating his opposition, Rush infamously described net
neutrality as “a solution in search of a problem.” [a statement that
he and his staff have repeated]
In 2010 the congressman signed a letter circulated by Rep. Gene Green
(D-TX) that assailed net neutrality, focusing on the FCC’s efforts to
reclassify broadband Internet. Green’s effort, which netted the
support of 74 Democrats, helped discourage the FCC from pursuing more
stringent net neutrality rules.

This week’s blog post marks the second time Rush has attacked
ColorOfChange.org in response to our criticism of his record on net
neutrality, while each time failing to address the substance of what
we’ve said. And he continues to tout support for his candidacy for
leadership on the Internet subcommittee from a list of Black
organizations, while failing to note that the most prominent, if not
all of those organizations have also received financial support from
big telecom companies.

Rep. Rush did begin to change his tune late last year (under pressure
from our campaign against his candidacy) saying that he’d defend the
FCC’s recent rules to protect net neutrality (which are too weak to do
the job properly). If this represents a shift in Rep. Rush’s position
on net neutrality — after hearing from thousands of people — we
welcome it. Based on his record, however, all indications are that
Rep. Rush would have used a leadership position on the Internet
subcommittee to help undermine net neutrality — and it’s a good thing
that Democrats on the subcommittee listened to ColorOfChange.org
members’ voices and chose to elect Anna Eshoo, a strong advocate for
net neutrality, as their leader. Eshoo is already demonstrating that
she will use her post on the subcommittee to push for strong open
Internet protections — shortly after winning the position, she called
out the FCC for failing to adequately protect net neutrality.

The fact that our members’ voices prevailed in this campaign should
serve as a strong warning to any politician or organization, of any
race, who is beholden to corporate interests on any issue, and acts
against the interests of their constituents on that issue: It won’t
work to run from your record, to attempt to shield yourself with your
political allies and your reputation, or even to hide behind a
genuinely strong record on other issues. The people you serve will
know what you are doing, they will join together to hold you
accountable, and they can win.

--
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org