What do virtually all 70+ Congressional Democrats who signed a letter supporting the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile have in common? They accepted campaign contributions in the thousands of dollars from AT&T. Paidcontent.org pieced together who got what, thanks to detailed records from the Center for Responsive Politics. Is your member of Congress on this list? Many of these members received $10,000 or more, and now you understand why:
G. K. Butterfield $10,500
Gene Green $10,000
Peter Welch $6,500
Joe Baca $10,250
John Barrow $10,000
Dan Boren $10,000
Robert Brady $9,000
Ben Chandler $7,000 Silvestre Reyes $8,500
William Lacy Clay, Jr. $10,500
Al Green $10,000
Alcee Hastings $10,000
Nick J. Rahall $10,000
James P. Moran $2,500
Gregory W. Meeks $9,500
Albio Sires $9,000
Tim Holden $8,000
Sanford D. Bishop, Jr. $11,250
Ed Pastor $10,000
Mike Ross $10,250
Rubén Hinojosa $7,500
Henry Cuellar $10,000
Joseph Crowley $10,000
Eddie Bernice Johnson $9,000
Luis Gutierrez $5,500
Adam Schiff $5,500
Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. $3,350
Adam Smith $4,500
Corrine Brown $6,000
Chaka Fattah $8,000 Henry C. Johnson, Jr. $2,000
Michael Michaud $8,500
Loretta Sanchez $11,000
Donna M. Christensen $7,500
Ted Deutch $6,000
Jim Costa $10,500
Betty McCollum $1,000
Ed Perlmutter $5,500 Brad Miller $2,000
Yvette Clarke $7,000
Grace Napolitano $4,000
Steve Cohen $5,000
Ron Kind $7,000
Betty Sutton $4,000
Heath Shuler $10,000
David Scott $11,500
Jared Polis NA
Cedric Richmond NA
Shelley Berkley $7,000
Frederica Wilson NA
Tim Bishop $10,500
Marcia Fudge $9,000
Rosa DeLauro $2,000
Karen Bass NA
Christopher S. Murphy $6,800
Frank Pallone $7,500
Laura Richardson $8,000
Dennis Cardoza $10,000
David Cicilline NA Raúl Grijalva $2,000
Danny K. Davis $6,000
Brad Sherman $5,500
Ben Ray Luján $5,000
Dutch Ruppersberger $7,500
Terri Sewell NA
John B. Larson $5,500
Charles A. Gonzalez $10,500
James R. Langevin $8,000
Collin C. Peterson $4,500
Jerry McNerney $12,750
Joe Courtney $4,250
Gerald Connolly $9,500
A major scandal in one of the nation’s most important gay civil rights organizations has inadvertently exposed AT&T’s public policy skunkworks — a dollar-a-holler operation to advocate for the company’s merger with T-Mobile, complete with pre-written advocacy letters, traded favors and promises of support from other board members, paid for with big financial contributions.
When it was all over, the president of Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) resigned, his ties to a Republican operative board member connected with AT&T were exposed, and the progressive gay and lesbian media outed the whole sordid affair — painting one of the clearest pictures yet of how civil rights groups get into the unenviable position of trading their good name for a piece of big business action.
As Stop the Cap! has reported for nearly three years now, there is a cottage industry in the non-profit sector collecting favors and contributions in return for letters on organization letterhead supporting the public policy agendas of their corporate sponsors. Honest non-profit groups won’t engage on issues that have little or no connection to their mission statements, but other groups have relaxed those standards to meet fundraising goals or to deal with internal board politics.
The latter appears to be the most prominent reason for GLAAD’s poorly managed entry into the debate on Net Neutrality and AT&T’s merger targets — the first time the group has ever spoken up about a corporate merger. Because so many in the gay, lesbian, and transgendered community are politically aware, it came as quite a shock when GLAAD suddenly dove into two issues most assumed were not relevant to the group’s mission:
GLAAD Net Neutrality Intrigue: On January 4, 2010, GLAAD President Jarrett Barrios signed a letter to the Federal Communications Commission expressing “concern” about the implementation of formal protection of the open Internet through Net Neutrality. At the time, nothing about Barrios’ letter seemed suspicious. In fact, it was typical of the type and tone of concern trolling by certain groups that could pay a stiff price if rank and file members ever found out. But several members did and raised hell with GLAAD’s leadership over the issue. Barrios evidently panicked, quickly sending a follow-up letter to the FCC claiming his signature was forged and begging the ‘fake’ submission be withdrawn. Ironically, he added the views in the original letter, unclear as they were, did not represent GLAAD’s position on Net Neutrality, whatever it was.
GLAAD Loves AT&T and T-Mobile’s Merger: On May 31st, Barrios joined the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce in penning a joint letter advocating the merger because, apparently, gay people love 4G, artistic use of the Internet, and telemedicine. Gay groups immediately pounced, some describing the letter bizarre, others potentially offensive. The second letter ignited an all-out firestorm against GLAAD’s leadership, particularly considering AT&T has donated profusely to GLAAD over the years, and gay people have no more love towards AT&T and its business agenda than anyone else.
Signorile
Head scratching over why GLAAD was obsessed with delivering a helping hand to AT&T was soon followed by detailed investigations which began to uncover the important underlying facts.
One pivotal moment came from Michelangelo Signorile, a long-time gay activist and radio talk show host, who interviewed GLAAD’s former board co-chair, Laurie Perper. Perper left GLAAD suggesting its board was in turmoil under the leadership of Barrios. In her words, Barrios’ efforts to shore up his presidency included trading an AT&T advocacy letter for a company-connected board member’s continued support.
Perper also dismissed Barrios’ suggestion that the letter to the FCC about Net Neutrality was forged. Instead, she claims, Barrios tried to blame it on his administrative assistant, Jeanne Christiano, who he claimed ambitiously sent the letter without his authorization.
Former GLAAD board co-chair Laurie Perper talks with Michelangelo Signorile about the connection between AT&T and GLAAD’s president. June 7, 2011. (11 minutes)
You must remain on this page to hear the clip, or you can download the clip and listen later.
The letter’s origins lay with AT&T; the telecom giant sent Barrios suggested wording for another letter to the FCC. Barrios’ special assistant used the language verbatim to create the letter, signed his name to it, and sent it in.
Barrios recounts that he was at an airport when his assistant called him to go through some items on his agenda. In a hurry to board his plane, when she told him that “they” wanted him to send in the letter to the FCC, Barrios assumed he needed to resend his first letter again. He authorized her to send the letter without any oversight.
[…] “This was from a letter with language from AT&T suggesting that we support this, and at the time, it was not something I had seen,” Barrios said. “When I saw it, we withdrew it to reflect our perspective.”
Barrios: Now updating his resume
Further investigations uncovered AT&T-connected board member Troup Coronado. Many activists were surprised to learn learn Coronado is or was a paid consultant for AT&T and a Republican operative who used to work for Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). While involved in Congress, Coronado worked to install judges hostile to gay and lesbian rights on the federal bench. Today, he is a board member overseeing one of the nation’s most important gay and lesbian rights groups.
That revelation went over about as well as one could expect, and within a week, Barrios submitted his resignation, and calls for Coronado to leave are growing louder by the hour.
The intrigue has thrown GLAAD into full scale damage control mode, even as former board members like Perper call the group hopelessly brand tarnished and advocate its disbanding. It also embarrasses AT&T by further exposing the sock-puppetry operations it runs to build phantom support for its business and policy agenda.
How Former and Current FCC Employees Helped Other Gay Groups (Heart) AT&T
GLAAD is not the only LGBT group in the chorus conducted by AT&T. The National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce is no more friendly to consumer interests than any other Chamber of Commerce, and their participation in fronting for AT&T was to be expected. But the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force is now repenting for their own involvement in AT&T’s bought and paid for parade:
“The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force submitted a letter to the Federal Communications Commission on Jan. 5, 2010, about rules and regulations regarding net neutrality. The letter was a response to a request by AT&T,” she said. “However, we quickly realized that we had not gone through an appropriate internal process on such policy matters and that the Jan. 5 letter did not accurately reflect our views and was a mistake. As a result, on Jan. 14, the Task Force submitted an additional letter to the FCC clarifying the organization’s position on net neutrality.”
“The Task Force has established a clearer internal review process that applies to any request for sign-on or policy endorsement from any group, organization or corporate partner. We have not issued any additional letters on net neutrality. Additionally the Task Force has declined requests from our corporate partner AT&T for further action regarding this issue and declined requests to write a letter regarding the proposed merger between AT&T and T-Mobile.”
Perhaps even more disturbing, new evidence is emerging that the FCC itself may be encouraging some of these civil rights groups to participate in discussions about controversial industry events. The Bilerico Project discovered FCC chief Bill Lake meeting with GLAAD to talk specifically about how the group could become involved in public policy debates:
What’s not disclosed, however, is that Robinson, Barrios and board member Anthony Varona met with FCC chief Bill Lake and Deputy Director Bob Radcliffe in mid-May of last year. Varona is a former FCC attorney.
“Rashad, Jarrett and Tony met with the FCC in May 2010 to discuss GLAAD’s involvement in present and future FCC proceedings (including broadband proliferation items, public interest programming initiatives, etc.),” according to Rich Ferraro, GLAAD’s Director of Communications. The group denies that they took a formal position on any matter pending before the FCC at the time.
If true, this could link corporate astroturfing and dollar-a-holler advocacy to FCC insiders currently at the agency, as well as those who used to work there.
A word to the wise: if your non-profit needs cash, ask for contributions from your members. Don’t sell out your good name for a billion-dollar corporate merger. The position you protect may turn out to be your own.
The U.S. Cattlemen’s Association this week took some time out to go all out for AT&T’s proposed merger with T-Mobile. In addition to successfully navigating the FCC’s arcane comment filing system to submit their comments in favor of the merger, the group also penned a lengthy, favorable guest blog for Washington, D.C. inside-the-beltway-favorite, The Hill newspaper:
The expansion of next-generation wireless broadband envisioned by the T-Mobile and AT&T merger, for example, is critical for the next stage of rural America’s evolution and success. It will allow ranchers, farmers, and all rural residents who have been traditionally underserved to finally gain access to the best that mobile broadband has to offer, including faster and more reliable connections. We strongly encourage the Federal Communications Commission to support these developments as an investment in both the current and future generations of agricultural producers and small communities across rural America.
The cattlemen’s group has had a lot to say about telecommunications issues, especially mergers and acquisitions. It was cited by Verizon as a supporter of its merger with Alltel in 2008, signed a joint letter in 2008 from industry-connected Connected Nation for a broadband plan compatible with the interests of the nation’s largest cable and phone companies, wrote a letter to the FCC opposing Net Neutrality in 2009, and submitted two pages of comments in May favoring the merger between AT&T and T-Mobile.
Apparently there is plenty of free time on the ranch to ponder billion dollar telecommunications mergers.
The argument from the group is that permitting mergers and blocking open net policies like Net Neutrality will convince carriers to provide enhanced service in rural areas where cattle ranches predominate. But facts in evidence illustrate how wrong-headed that argument is:
Verizon’s merger with Alltel has done nothing to bring its LTE network to rural America. Verizon is focusing LTE upgrades on the markets where it makes the most business sense, and that does not include rural Texas or Oklahoma;
The National Broadband Plan has directed stimulus funding for rural projects that are most likely to reach their ranch members — wireless ISPs and rural DSL. The cattlemen’s group has nothing to say about either provider;
Net Neutrality and the policies of an open and free Internet have no real impact on rural broadband deployment. The same companies refusing to provide service yesterday are still refusing to provide service today, and that includes completely exempted wireless providers;
T-Mobile’s urban-suburban focus is a mainstay of its business plan. T-Mobile has never prioritized rural America as a viable service area, relying on roaming agreements to fill in service gaps. Combining its urban-focused wireless infrastructure with AT&T will add nothing to the rural wireless experience.
The Washington Post finds financial connections between AT&T and the cattlemen group.
Advocating for a merger with T-Mobile makes about as much sense as the group advocating for a T-Mobile merger with Leap Wireless’ Cricket or MetroPCS. All have a record of indifference about providing service in rural areas themselves.
So why does the group persist in fronting for AT&T’s public policy agenda? Cecilia Kang at the Washington Post tweeted the obvious answer — they receive support from AT&T.
The piece for The Hill was penned by Jess Peterson, the cattlemen group’s executive vice president. But Peterson has a second career: president of Washington, D.C.-based Western Skies Strategies, a lobbying firm that promises “success and profitability to our valued clients every time.”
Facts have a hard time penetrating piles of cash, but here are some anyway:
T-Mobile’s combination with AT&T may create additional capacity for the combined company, but almost entirely in urban and suburban areas that will do nothing to help rural wireless.
No telecommunications company has a track record of providing service in areas unprofitable to serve or fail return on investment demands. No merger will change that.
Promises for network upgrades already committed in long-range business plans do not sweeten a bitter deal for Americans concerned about competition in the wireless marketplace.
T-Mobile’s track record as being the most market-disruptive in pricing and innovation will be eliminated in a merger with America’s lowest rated wireless carrier.
Any excitement for rural wireless broadband from AT&T is tempered when would-be customers realize the company enforces a 2GB usage cap with an overlimit fee on their smartphone data plans — an Internet Overcharging scheme more punishing than either Verizon or Sprint.
Bloomberg News covers Sprint’s increasingly aggressive pushback against the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile. But while Bloomberg points out consumer groups are using websites to help consumers file comments opposing the deal, they ignore the fact deal supporters are engaged in their own dollar-a-holler campaign to win the merger’s approval. (2 minutes)
[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bloomberg ATT Concessions 6-01-11.mp4[/flv]
The opposition to the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile is growing louder and more organized as smaller carriers join Sprint’s opposition efforts. Consumer groups roundly dismiss the proposed merger as anti-competition and anti-consumer. Michael Nelson, a securities analyst, tells Bloomberg News the vote for the merger’s approval could be close and the company will probably have to agree to more concessions than it thinks. But considering AT&T’s enormous lobbying power, Nelson still thinks the deal will squeak through. Nelson, however, warns the merger will bring about a considerable reduction in the disruptive pricing T-Mobile has engaged in — pricing that benefits consumers and forces larger carriers to follow suit. To Nelson, eliminating an aggressive competitor like T-Mobile will bring about what he calls “a rational competitive environment.” That means higher prices, no surprises, and a stagnant marketplace. Wall Street understands the implications of this deal, all while knowingly winking at AT&T’s marketing/lobbying machine that claims reduced competition = better service. (4 minutes)
Gov. Purdue: I Was for More Competition Before I Was Against It
Democratic Gov. Bev Purdue from North Carolina has managed to twist her logic into quite a pretzel over two statements from her office in the past two weeks. On the community broadband front, Purdue protested legislation to reduce competitive choices in broadband in her state (all underlining ours):
May 20, 2011:
“My concern with House Bill 129 is that the restrictions the General Assembly has imposed on cities and towns who want to offer broadband services may have the effect of decreasing the number of choices available to their citizens. For these reasons, I will neither sign nor veto this bill. Instead, I call on the General Assembly to revisit this issue and adopt rules that not only promote fairness but also allow for the greatest number of high quality and affordable broadband options for consumers.”
Just 11 days later, Purdue inferred the exact opposite in her letter of support for the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile, which will reduce most of North Carolina to choosing among AT&T, Verizon, and in some cases Sprint. One of her reasons? The city of Raleigh is getting a new area code:
May 31, 2011:
The proposed merger of AT&T and T-Mobile presents another development in the marketplace which can benefit the people of my state.
The communications market in North Carolina, particularly in the wireless arena, is dynamic. Recently, the NC Utilities Commission announced the Raleigh area will soon implement a new area code, the eighth in the state, due primarily to the tremendous growth in wireless service.
In North Carolina we are committed to stimulating investments in advanced technology, and encourage quality service for the public. We look forward to working closely with AT&T to foster these important goals.
On behalf of the people of North Carolina, I appreciate your strong consideration in favor of the proposed merger of AT&T and T-Mobile.
Allow AT&T and T-Mobile to merge because Raleigh needs a new area code, proving wireless growth. That may account among the most novel of all reasons to support a merger that will further reduce competition in the wireless market.
Be Sure to Read Part One: Astroturf Overload — Broadband for America = One Giant Industry Front Group for an important introduction to what this super-sized industry front group is all about. Members of Broadband for America Red: A company or group actively engaging in anti-consumer lobbying, opposes Net Neutrality, supports Internet Overcharging, belongs to […]
Astroturf: One of the underhanded tactics increasingly being used by telecom companies is “Astroturf lobbying” – creating front groups that try to mimic true grassroots, but that are all about corporate money, not citizen power. Astroturf lobbying is hardly a new approach. Senator Lloyd Bentsen is credited with coining the term in the 1980s to […]
Hong Kong remains bullish on broadband. Despite the economic downturn, City Telecom continues to invest millions in constructing one of Hong Kong’s largest fiber optic broadband networks, providing fiber to the home connections to residents. City Telecom’s HK Broadband service relies on an all-fiber optic network, and has been dubbed “the Verizon FiOS of Hong […]
BendBroadband, a small provider serving central Oregon, breathlessly announced the imminent launch of new higher speed broadband service for its customers after completing an upgrade to DOCSIS 3. Along with the launch announcement came a new logo of a sprinting dog the company attaches its new tagline to: “We’re the local dog. We better be […]
Stop the Cap! reader Rick has been educating me about some of the new-found aggression by Shaw Communications, one of western Canada’s largest telecommunications companies, in expanding its business reach across Canada. Woe to those who get in the way. Novus Entertainment is already familiar with this story. As Stop the Cap! reported previously, Shaw […]
The Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission, the Canadian equivalent of the Federal Communications Commission in Washington, may be forced to consider American broadband policy before defining Net Neutrality and its role in Canadian broadband, according to an article published today in The Globe & Mail. [FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s] proposal – to codify and enforce some […]
In March 2000, two cable magnates sat down for the cable industry equivalent of My Dinner With Andre. Fine wine, beautiful table linens, an exquisite meal, and a Monopoly board with pieces swapped back and forth representing hundreds of thousands of Canadian consumers. Ted Rogers and Jim Shaw drew a line on the western Ontario […]
Just like FairPoint Communications, the Towering Inferno of phone companies haunting New England, Frontier Communications is making a whole lot of promises to state regulators and consumers, if they’ll only support the deal to transfer ownership of phone service from Verizon to them. This time, Frontier is issuing a self-serving press release touting their investment […]
I see it took all of five minutes for George Ou and his friends at Digital Society to be swayed by the tunnel vision myopia of last week’s latest effort to justify Internet Overcharging schemes. Until recently, I’ve always rationalized my distain for smaller usage caps by ignoring the fact that I’m being subsidized by […]
In 2007, we took our first major trip away from western New York in 20 years and spent two weeks an hour away from Calgary, Alberta. After two weeks in Kananaskis Country, Banff, Calgary, and other spots all over southern Alberta, we came away with the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: The Good Alberta […]
A federal appeals court in Washington has struck down, for a second time, a rulemaking by the Federal Communications Commission to limit the size of the nation’s largest cable operators to 30% of the nation’s pay television marketplace, calling the rule “arbitrary and capricious.” The 30% rule, designed to keep no single company from controlling […]
Less than half of Americans surveyed by PC Magazine report they are very satisfied with the broadband speed delivered by their Internet service provider. PC Magazine released a comprehensive study this month on speed, provider satisfaction, and consumer opinions about the state of broadband in their community. The publisher sampled more than 17,000 participants, checking […]