Our friends at the Sunlight Foundation believe (like we do) that all legislation should be posted online for at least 72 hours before a vote, to give lawmakers and citizens sufficient time to review and debate it. The "Financial Bailout" bill was posted online for review--which was a start. But Sunlight Foundation called on Congress to go farther.

They created a petition urging Congress to wait until October 1, 2008 before voting on the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. (That would be 72 hours since it was first posted online.)

You can read the petition here.

From the Sunlight Foundation's press release:

"Congress took a real step yesterday toward legislative transparency, by giving the public access to the proposed bailout legislation by posting it online in advance of floor consideration," said Ellen Miller, executive director and co-founder of the Sunlight Foundation. "But, before the bailout proposal is considered by lawmakers, it must undergo an even more important test: evaluation and assessment by Americans. That's why we are calling on citizens to sign a petition to urge Congress to wait 72 hours between when the bill was first posted online and the actual vote. We believe all legislation should posted online for at least three days before a vote to give lawmakers and citizens sufficient time to review and debate it, and this bill is no exception. This isn't a bill to rename a few courthouses; this bill is Congress's biggest intervention in the economy in decades. This important legislation deserves more time for public scrutiny."

Speaker Pelosi and the House Financial Services Committee posted the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 as a PDF yesterday in the late afternoon. Late Sunday night, Sunlight posted the text of the legislation PublicMarkup.org, allowing citizens to review and comment on the $700 billion bailout of the financial industry before the House and Senate vote on the measure. The simple-to-use blog-like layout of PublicMarkup.org lets users critique the entire bill or offer views on specific provisions, bringing citizen oversight to the legislation.

Since Sunlight posted the legislative proposals from the Treasury Department and Senator Dodd on PublicMarkup.org last week, citizens flooded the site with hundreds of comments on these iterations of the bailout bill.

Monica caught this story in The Hill today about the public backlash against the proposed $700 billion federal bailout of the banking industry. We've got excerpts below, but the story can pretty much be summed up in three words: people are angry.

As Kelly Williams and Laura MacCleery write:

It has been a long time since there has been such an outpouring of voter outrage on Capitol Hill. Although partisans are busily pointing fingers across the aisle about the defeat of the hurried, behind-the-scenes bailout deal in the House on Monday, the failures are so fundamental that it is increasingly clear that Washington will never be the same again. The bailout is stirring an intensely populist backlash across the political spectrum, and that much anger will not dissipate anytime soon.

They go on to present a scathing picture of how lobbyist and PAC money influences politics--and how that kind of money got us into this mess in the first place:

Wall Street routinely doles out large campaign contributions to members of Congress. In the current election cycle, the financial services sector (which includes insurance and real sector), contributed more money to candidates for Congress, the presidency and political parties than did any other sector, totaling $339.6 million from 2007 through today. Both chambers’ banking committees also benefit handsomely. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, PACs and employees of the securities and investment industry are the second largest source of cash for members of the Senate Banking committee. During the 2008 election cycle, these contributors raised $11.7 million for the 21 members of that Committee. Banking Committee Chairman Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn) received about $4.3 million since 2003, or half of all contributions to his campaign coffers.

Does campaign cash influence legislation and regulation? When Congress last debated regulation (or rather, de-regulation) of the financial industry in 1999, a study by the Center for Responsive Politics showed that members of Congress who supported the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act received twice as much money from commercial banks, investment banks, and insurance companies as those who opposed the measure. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was the product of many years of lobbying by the financial industry and allowed for the loosening of bank regulations that had been in place since the Great Depression.

You can read the rest of the article here.

An article in the Politico today describes just how much money former Capitol Hill staffers can make working as lobbyists on K Street. The salaries are pretty shocking.

While dozens of lawmakers and senior aides are trading their congressional badges for lobbying registrations, some holdouts are resisting the call--even with salary offers of $350,000 to $500,000.

These stubborn governing junkies are among the most coveted by K Street. They are the insiders’ insiders and policy whizzes, whom top officials at lobbying shops and major corporations believe could add significant talent and expertise to their already deep benches.

It still shocks me when people talk about buying access in such frank terms. The article describes the trade--cash for access--in a matter-of-fact way, as if it's completely unsurprising.

For lobbying shops, a big risk in hiring a congressional aide is betting they can perform on the outside as well as they have on the inside.

But "performing" on behalf of an entirely different cause.

Our friends at the Sunlight Foundation (who seem to never sleep) have unveiled yet another terrific tool. This time it's the Open Senate Project, which is modeled on the Open House Project, and will help improve public access to the Senate's work on the Web.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has endorsed the project. From the press release:

"I welcome ideas for how the U.S. Senate can use technology and the Internet to create more transparency for the operations of the U.S. Senate, and to bring us closer to our constituents," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, in response to the project's launch. "To that end, I look forward to the recommendations from the Open Senate Project, which will be an open, public collaborative effort."

The Open Senate Project will include an email list and blog, which citizens and open government leaders will use to develop their recommendations. John Wonderlich, program director for the Sunlight Foundation, will lead the nonpartisan effort. He will be joined by Josh Tauberer, creator of GovTrack.us, and Jon Hencke, a former Senate staffer who now blogs at The Next Right.com.

Sunlight encourages citizens to give their input by joining the group’s email list.

The folks at MAPLight.org issued a report today titled 'Remote Control,' which shows the geographic origin, down to zip code, of campaign contributions for all members of the U.S. House of Representatives. The most surprising finding? Legislators raised about four out of every five dollars in campaign funds from outside of where their constituents live.

According to the research, members of the House of Representatives raised $700 million in campaign funds from 2005-2007. A whopping $551 million of these funds, or 79%, came from out-of-district. $146 million of these funds, or 21%, came from in-district. The remaining $3 million of campaign funds (0.5%) could not be definitively located as in-district or out-of-district. From the report:

"With out-of-district fundraising at a staggering 80%, the problem is not with a few individual House members. This report provides evidence that our campaign finance system is broken," said Daniel Newman, MAPLight.org's co-founder and executive director. "To win an election, a House candidate has to raise an average of $1.3 million in campaign funds--that's $2,500 every working day for an entire two year term. With such a herculean fundraising effort required, what time and attention do Representatives have left to address the interests of the voters they represent?"

See the full report at MAPLight.org.

To all our San Francisco friends, don't forget the party tonight hosted by the Stanford Law School for Professor Lessig's new book Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy.

Here's the details:

When: Wed Oct 29, 2008

Where: W Hotel SF - 181 Third Street, SF

Free food and drinks for everyone.

Reception is at 6:30pm

Program is at 7pm.

Contact Elaine Adolfo at a2lessig@pobox.com with any questions.

Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) was found guilty on seven counts of corruption this week, but he's refusing to step down--even though politicians from both sides of the aisle have called on him to resign. Yesterday we sent an email to friends and supporters of Change Congress, asking folks to watch our "Farewell, Ted" video and sign on to a petition demanding that Senate leaders remove him from office.

Here's the text of the email, with links:

Dear Supporter,

Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) was found guilty on seven counts of corruption this week[1], but, he's refusing to step down. Politicians from both sides of the aisle, including Barack Obama and John McCain, have called on him to resign. It's time to add your voice to the mix.

Click here to watch our video, "Farewell, Ted." Then sign our petition calling for Senate leaders to remove him from the Senate:

http://change-congress.org/ted

The petition reads:

"He has broken our trust. It's time to let another Alaskan step up and represent the Last Frontier state. For this reason, we are calling on you to remove him from the Senate. Joining with both presidential candidates Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain we are requesting that you not allow a convicted felon continue to serve as a U.S. Senator."

Now that Ted Stevens has been convicted of corruption, he has no place in the Senate. The American people demand leaders who work for us, rather than abusing our trust. If Stevens does not resign, he must be removed from office.

We'll deliver copies of this petition to leaders in the Senate, including Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), whether or not Stevens is still serving next week. Help us send the message that corruption in the Senate will not be tolerated.

Ted Stevens received all kinds of gifts that he didn't disclose: A $1,000 sled dog. A $3,200 handmade stained glass window. A $2,695 massage chair. Not to mention $250,000 in labor and materials for Stevens' vacation home from Veco Corporation, an oil-field service company.[2] All this for keeping his friends at Veco in mind when he went to Washington and allocated over $88 million in earmarks to just one bill that came before Congress. [3]

Our Senators should not be for sale, whether for the price of a massage chair, a vacation home, or anything else. Click the link below to watch our video, and then help us say "Farewell, Ted" once and for all.

http://change-congress.org/ted

Thank you for holding our leaders accountable!

Japhet, Stephanie, Monica and the Change Congress Team

Sources:

1. "Stevens guilty on all counts, campaign to continue," Associated Press, Oct. 28, 2008. http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5je6Pw1sViz24JRo9F0PNhoqMtzTwD94349103

2. "Ted Stevens got a massage chair, dog, prosecutors claim," Miami Herald, Oct. 28, 2008. http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/744853.html

3. "Scandal-infested Stevens doles out earmarks for rodent control," Think Progress, Dec. 18, 2007 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/18/stevens-rodent-control/

Be sure to watch the Charlie Rose show tonight at 12 AM PT to see his latest conversation with Professor Lessig. It's sure to be fascinating. You can also see their last conversation here, on the Charlie Rose website.