ESA Contributes to Obama Campaign Co-Chairman, Others

October 17, 2008 -

Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL), national co-chair of Barack Obama's presidential campaign, was among recipients of 3rd quarter campaign contributions from the video game industry's political action committee. Jackson (left), who received $1,000, is the son of the Rev. Jesse Jackson.

As GamePolitics has previously reported, the Entertainment Software Association, which lobbies on behalf of U.S. game publishers, formed its PAC late last year and began making contributions in 2008.

In addition to Jackson, 3rd quarter campaign donation recipients include:

  • $1,000 - Sen. Gordon Harold Smith (R-OR)
  • $2,300 - Rep. Mary Bono Mack (R-CA)
  • $1,000 - George Radanovich (R-CA)
  • $1,000 - Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL)

Contributions to the ESA PAC came from:

  • $5,000 - Walt Disney Employees PAC
  • $250 - EA P.R. exec Jeff Brown

It's always entertaining to guess why the ESA chooses to fund particular candidates. In Jackson's case, the strong Obama connection is a significant clue. In addition, the seven-term Democrat is a member of the House Appropriations Committee. His family connections can't hurt, either, although he has occasionally been put in the position of doing damage control over comments made by his father.

Bono Mack, a moderate Republican, has been a strong supporter of copyright protections in the past, which makes her a natural ally of video game publishers. The ESA PAC actually made a contribution to her in the first quarter, but it appears that the check wasn't cashed for some reason and was re-issued.

Smith is a moderate Republican who serves on the Senate Commerce Committee. He has a track record of supporting IP content owners, so it's not difficult to guess why the ESA would look favorably upon his re-election. As a longtime Tivo and DVR user, GP notes this rather disturbing passage from Smith's Wikipedia page:

In January 2006, Smith began circulating a draft of the Digital Content Protection Act of 2006... The legislation would grant the Federal Communications Commission the authority to authorize a technology known as the "broadcast flag." This technology would enable the producers of television programming to ensure the programs cannot be recorded by viewers in their homes, for instance using a digital video recorder like TiVo or onto recordable DVDs.

Wasserman-Schultz seconded Obama's nomination at the DNC and serves on the House Appropriations and Judiciary committees. Radanovich is a conservative Republican who serves on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Why these two members of Congress were selected for support is not clear.

For a copy of the ESA PAC Q3 report click here.

For previous GamePolitics coverage of ESA campaign contributions, click here.


Comments

Re: ESA Contributes to Obama Campaign Co-Chairman, Others

Wasserman-Schulz is extremely influential in Florida, and has been doing very well handling the increased visibility with her close association to the Obama campaign. She stands to pick up considerable power within the House over the next terms. It's pretty obvious that she's a solid pick to me.

 

 

Dan "SWATJester" Rosenthal

Executive Director, GamesLaw.net

Member, ABA IP Law Division Special Committee on Computer Gaming and Virtual Worlds

-- Dan Rosenthal

Re: ESA Contributes to Obama Campaign Co-Chairman, Others

No shock seeing the Bono name there - hell it should have double or triple that amount for what her late husband has done IRP extentions.

-------------------------------------------

"The most difficult pain a man can suffer is to have knowledge of much and power over little" - Herodotus

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The most difficult pain a man can suffer is to have knowledge of much and power over little" - Herodotus
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Mattsworknameour concerns about them were well founded.07/28/2015 - 7:50pm
MattsworknameDepends on who you ask, accountable fto it's audiance, accountablie for lies and half truths, accountible for disengenous statements, everyone had there own reasons for going after them. Although in the case of gawker, recent events seem to indicate that07/28/2015 - 7:50pm
Andrew EisenAccountable for... what, exactly?07/28/2015 - 7:48pm
MattsworknameI think the intent was to force some kind of accountabilty on them. Granted As I said ,i wasn't exactly big on the ideas of attacking advertisers but it's a common and well used tactic. Sadly, theres not many other ways of holding media sites acountable07/28/2015 - 7:47pm
MechaTama31With the goal of...? Getting those media outlets to fire or silence the "scum"? That's shitty.07/28/2015 - 7:44pm
Mattsworknamewarned about the scum there assoicating with. Looking at you GAWKER media07/28/2015 - 7:37pm
MattsworknameI think the only reason it was the first action was alot of people felt it was the only option that might have an actual impact. and to be honest, i don't see how they were exactly wrong. Plus, as recent events showed, soem times adverisers need to be07/28/2015 - 7:37pm
MattsworknameTo be honest, I was always kinda on edge about that, while I did not like that those news outlets had acted in the way theey did, i didn't like that we thought boycotting and advertiser attacks were the only recourse07/28/2015 - 7:36pm
MechaTama31And after AE questioned that same analogy, I described it as extreme hyperbole.07/28/2015 - 7:36pm
E. Zachary KnightMecha, The "bullying and threatening" thing is from an earlier shout by Matt. I asked you tht question because you compared the petition to someone threatening to shoot your child.07/28/2015 - 7:35pm
Andrew EisenBy the way, if anyone can see into alternate timelines, I've got $20 that says Target would have ignored the petition had it been presented at the game's launch instead of over a year later.07/28/2015 - 7:34pm
MechaTama31Write a "Gamers are Alive" article. Make a video highlighting positive things about games. Counter your opponent, don't try to silence them.07/28/2015 - 7:33pm
MechaTama31EZK: Who exactly are you quoting with "bullying and threatening"? But yes, I think attacking someone's livelihood because you disagree with their opinion is underhanded and damaging to discourse.07/28/2015 - 7:30pm
E. Zachary KnightOh no. A successful online petition could embolden people to do... what exactly? Do another online petition?07/28/2015 - 7:30pm
Andrew EisenToo bad the counter petition wasn't as popular. But again, yeah, it sucks. For the reasons I've stated over and over now.07/28/2015 - 7:29pm
MechaTama31otherwise want to.07/28/2015 - 7:27pm
MechaTama31AE: I mean like right and wrong, not like true and false. And even the perception that the petition worked could be damaging. It could embolden these types of people in the future, and make it less likely for a retailer to puch back even if they otherwi07/28/2015 - 7:27pm
Andrew EisenBut yes, it is a damn shame that Target decided to kowtow in this case, best business decision or not.07/28/2015 - 7:27pm
Andrew EisenNo one's free expression was impinged. Anyone is welcome to petition whatever they want. Anyone is free to counter petition (and did in this case). Target was free to make it's own decision on whether to continue to stock GTA V or not.07/28/2015 - 7:26pm
E. Zachary KnightMatt, Mecha, So, if a petition asking a store to not sell a game is "bullying and threatening" is a petition asking Intel to pull ads from Gamasutra "bullying and threatening"?07/28/2015 - 7:25pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician