Prop 8 donor law shows disclosure is a two edged sword

[galaxy21]

FOR the backers of Proposition 8, the state ballot measure to stop single-sex couples from marrying in California, victory has been soured by the ugly specter of intimidation.

A Web site takes names and ZIP codes of donors supporting the measure and overlays data on a map.
Some donors to groups supporting the measure have received death threats and envelopes containing a powdery white substance, and their businesses have been boycotted.

The targets of this harassment blame a controversial and provocative Web site, eightmaps.com.

...

Eightmaps.com is the latest, most striking example of how information collected through disclosure laws intended to increase the transparency of the political process, magnified by the powerful lens of the Web, may be undermining the same democratic values that the regulations were to promote.

With tools like eightmaps — and there are bound to be more of them — strident political partisans can challenge their opponents directly, one voter at a time. The results, some activists fear, could discourage people from participating in the political process altogether.

That is why the soundtrack to eightmaps.com is a loud gnashing of teeth among civil libertarians, privacy advocates and people supporting open government. The site pits their cherished values against each other: political transparency and untarnished democracy versus privacy and freedom of speech.

...

Another idea, proposed by a Georgetown professor, is for the state Web sites that make donor information available to ask people who want to download and repurpose the data to provide some form of identification, like a name and credit card number.

“The key here is developing a process that balances the sometimes competing goals of transparency and privacy,” said the professor, Ned Moran, whose undergraduate class on information privacy spent a day discussing the eightmaps site last month.

“Both goals are essential for a healthy democracy,” he said, “and I think we are currently witnessing, as demonstrated by eightmaps, how the increased accessibility of personal information is disrupting the delicate balance between them.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/business/08stream.html



I've said before I think eightmaps is a terrible idea, and I think the last suggestion the man makes is very good one. It preserves political openess, and ensures that not only are donors help accountable, but people who have the information are held accountable as well. I do think if you want access to donor information, you should leave your own name or a credit card number, so no one will risk behaving outside the law.

[Ian David]

1. I donated to "No on 8" because I WANTED to be on-the-record.

What are the chrisTian-cowards complaining about?

[galaxy21]

2. They have no right to complain about boycotts, but the criticism against eightmaps is valid

Let's be honest, if pro life nutcases made a similar map of pro choice donors people on here would go crazy. In this instance, we may support the political cause, but the tactic is still repulsive.

[Ian David]

3. I reject your equivalency argument. n/t

[galaxy21]

4. why?

[TreasonousBastard]

5. Death threats, for one thing.

[rurallib]

6. seems to me that the problem is not releasing the names but

what the whacked out fringe does with them on either side.
I for one think hat such information should be available.
It appears that the RW is getting a backlash on tactics they have been using for hundreds of years. I am not condoning it. The night riders on through the planned parenthood clinic bombers on up to the cowards that have called me anonymously have used terror as a political tactic from day 1 in this country. Now it is starting to blow back at them.
I doubt the whacked out right wing in this country will stop using their terrorist tactics. They were early purveyors of hate on the internet. Suddenly it becomes a problem when it is pointed back at their followers.
One can thank te republican party for their 'divide and conquer' political strategy. They have divided this country into armed oppositions.

[Skinner]

7. I agree that publishing maps like this is troubling.

I'm not sure what the solution is. I'll admit that disclosure laws have made me change the way I donate.

I don't care if anyone knows which candidates and causes I donate my money to -- everyone knows that I am a Democrat, and a supporter of progressive causes. But I don't want my home address available to anyone. As the administrator of this website, I get occasional email threats from unbalanced right-wing nutcases (and a few obsessed lefties), and I would prefer that they not know where I live.

After a DU member dug up my donations to John Kerry and used it to claim (incorrectly) that I secretly supported him in the 2004 primary, I realized that I probably need to be careful about my donations. (I donated to Kerry after he had the nomination locked up, but because I donated before the convention it showed as a primary campaign donation.) That made me realize that because of my job, there are people out there who are interested in what I do. It was very disturbing.

In 2008 I gave exactly $199 to Obama's campaign. (Disclosure begins at $200.) I don't want any crazies to know my home address.

[Baby Snooks]

12. One of the easiest ways to find you

That and voter registration records which in some cases are still available online despite your having "opted out" if you know where to look. I discovered mine were online along with all of our federal judges. Along with quite a few former victims of domestic abuse/violence, crime victims who were threatened by family members after their brother or sister was sent off to prison, and of course stalking victims. There are laws in effect in most of the states restricting access to records. They seem not to apply to voter registration records and campaign contributions.

I don't believe the FEC records list the address but other sources do. The Huffington Post records do. As do others.

I think the records should be made available. But without the address. Until the law makes sure the addresses are not listed, contributors beware.

[azureblue]

8. you left out

the part where the Yes on 8 backers used the donors list to intimidate. But you are right, it cuts both ways, and, too bad bigots- you got caught in the sunshine. This is the 21st Century, and a lot of information is available to the public. Leave the law the way it is. The problem is with those who use this information maliciously.

[galaxy21]

9. I agree that Yes on 8 people are not strangers to those type of tactics either

And we can speculate on what would have happened if No on 8 had won instead. But the point is, it didn't, so all we've seen is the negative behvaiour of No on 8 since it passed.


As for this 'too bad' attitude, it's very easy- and tempting- to disregard it. But, the point is, tactics like eightmaps ruin it for everybody. I think there are a lot of people that will be unlikely to give money to ANY political cause because they know something like eightmaps is not only possible but perfectly legal. It is screwing up the political processs.

Yes, in theory, you should be willing to stand up for a certain cause regardless of the consequeunces, but how many people want random nutcases being able to find them on a map? Especially, if you have children or a spouse who'll be alone at home.

No on 8 may have guaranteed people will think twice before giving to another anti gay marriage measure, but they've also ensured people will think twice before they give money to anything.

[msongs]

10. 100% full and open accountability - no hiding place for political cockroaches

influencing elections by cash donations is fine from individuals, but they need to be accountable. just like lobbyists are accountable (that's a joke, lobbyists are not really accountable).

"...the ugly specter of intimidation"? that's a laugh! The entire prop 8 issue is ugly intimidation against lgbt's and their friends, the ugly intimidation of religious bigots imposing their own religion on everyone else. the bible says adulterers should be stoned but I havent seen any stonings in the mormon church parking lot lately.

Msongs

[galaxy21]

11. Again though, this issue is bigger than Yes on 8 donors and even gay marriage,

Part of why I despise eightmaps, is that its sets a bad precedence. What's to stop pro life or pro gun people using the same tactic to scare off liberals from giving money to progressive causes? Or even anti gay marriage people, to use a similar map tactics to out gay donors and make them civilian targets for religious nutcases? Will you still approve of this then?

I think people are so pissed off about prop 8, they're willing to justify the unjustifiable. Some of the action against prop 8 donors has been legitimate. Some of it has not been. And when you're fighting for tolerance and claiming the moral high ground, it's important to divorce yourself from the lunatic fringe. The fact that most people on here thought eightmaps was a good idea is crazy to me.