John Conyers, It's Time to Speak Up

In the last 72 hours, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) received a lot of phone calls. Today, we're asking him to be responsive and speak up.

It all began Tuesday on The Huffington Post, when we wrote about Conyers' proposal to forbid the government from requiring scientists who receive taxpayer funds for medical research to publish their findings openly on the Internet.

Many political, science, and tech sites across the nation then wrote their own posts on this issue (including a major site from Conyers' home state).

Conyers' bill opposing "open access" is the darling of the publishing industry because it would force the public to buy for-profit journals to get information that would otherwise be online for free. A new report by transparency group MAPLight.org shows that sponsors of this bill--led by Conyers--received twice as much money from the publishing industry as those on the relevant committee who are not sponsors.

We asked people who cared about this issue to do two things.

First, join the Change Congress donor strike -- pledging to fight the underlying cause of this corruption by not giving a penny more to politicians who don't support reforming our campaign finance system. Since Tuesday, over $100,000 in donations were withdrawn from opponents of reform--bringing the strike's current total to $981,000 (based on people's contributions last cycle).

To join this push for big-picture reform, click here.

Then, everyone who joined the donor strike received an email telling them how to contact Conyers and their local member of Congress to voice opposition to this bill, H.R. 801. That resulted in lots of people sending us notes like these:

"I joined the donor strike and committed to not support politicians who don't support campaign finance reform. Then, I called Rep. George Miller asking him to oppose the bill and called Rep. Conyers asking him to withdraw it." - Daniel L., CA

"I joined the Change Congress donor strike and called Rep. Joe Courtney and left a message asking him to oppose the Conyers bill. I am very disappointed in Conyers, whom I had always respected until now. This kind of pay-to-play politics is not the type of change we had hoped for." - Marjorie O., CT

"Rep. Conyers is usually on our side. But this does not sound good. It is certainly against the wishes of the voters who were for Obama's philosophy of open government." - Huffington Post commenter

Every hour for the last few days, notes like these have been rolling into our inboxes and posted on blogs across the Internet.

Representative Conyers, the public deserves to know you are paying attention and that you understand our concerns. Will you publicly defend this bill? Will you announce that you are withdrawing it? Either way, the public deserves an answer.

If you haven't yet taken action, it's not too late. Please join the donor strike to help solve the underlying problem of special-interest influence, and then call the congressional numbers you receive over email.

Thanks for helping to Change Congress.

Comments

[NoelGreco]

Conyers is sponsoring this inaptly named ”Fair Copyright in Research Works Act”, whose title rivals that of the "Employee Free Choice Act" for intellectual dishonesty.

I am not surprised that he wants to investigate the Bush Administration, nor that he is married to Monica Conyers http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/articlee?AID=/20090301/OPINION03/903010308/1008/OPINION01)

[JohnHKennedy]

If you wast Conyers to do the right thing you will have to push hard. Eighty is too old for Congress. Now he wants to create a commission to study the Bush crimes. HAH! Fat chance.

Ths only way to get presidents to obey our Constitution is prosecute them when they violate it and our Federal laws.

Obama said,

"no one is above the law”

SO Congress must demand and the Justice Dept must appoint a Special Prosecutor with Subpoena Powers and the authority to indict all those officials found to have violated Federal Laws, Our Constitution or the Geneva Convention on Torture. The Statute of Limitations starts to run out in March. Prosecution will stop unnecessary wars and the damage to our economy caused by presidential lies and Abuse Of Power. Bush & Cheney confessed that they ordered torture. Very little additional investigation is needed.

Sen. Leahy & Rep. John Conyers' "blue ribbon commissions" will be nothing but a white wash and a burial for all time of the true facts.

We do not want a commission. We want them prosecuted.

YOU CAN HELP MAKE THEM PROSECUTE!

SIGN THE PETITION To Prosecute at
http://IndictBushNow.org

Have your local (OR National, such as the ACLU )progressive group Endorse this Letter to Attorney General Holder
http://ProsecuteBushCheney.org

Prosecute so our 30,000+ US Soldiers who were killed or maimed have not suffered in vain

[nccp1870]

The real issue beneath the surface of this debate is how will our society continue to have professional writing specialists--- editors, journalists, novelists, and all the other so necessary information folks that provide a continuity and standards which the rest of us depend upon.

Democracy must have open access to the most information possible. That does not simply mean drivel, but well-shaped and well-expressed thoughts, facts and arguments. Without that, democracy quickly decays into the feelings of a crowd on any given day.

The question is: how to pay the creator? With academics, one can argue they are already being paid to train apprentices, the next generation, and comment on the state of their art or science within that system. Most fund their journals through membership fees, so putting things out on the net is not going to break them. Many of us consider it a part of our work, and our cultural duty.

The argument at that level is clear....t­he educational system should see these folks get better pay, and thus, the public who pays for these institutions, gets the information.

As for out of touch old copyright holders, declare their rights void after a much shorter period. Copyright was never meant to fund dynastys or Disney mice forever.

That leaves our journalists. They are among the most important information shapers and finders in our society. We need to find a way to keep the information freely flowing and see that they can make a living.

[Ludwig]

I'm saddened to see that nobody here read Conyers' reply, or is willing to acknowledge that there are two sides to this issue. Maybe the system of academic publishing in this country isn't ideal, and maybe there needs to be a lot of disruption until a new system can be established. But nobody here even has a clue that there's a problem!

[WorkingClass]

I used to admire Conyers. Somewhere along the line somebody must have got to him. He should retire.

[RobHunt]

Sure -money is "evil."

OIL is evil.

People are evil.

The world would be a better place without people, medicine, oil, or differences of opinion.

Is that your point? I wonder if you have any IDEA what the world was like before the advent of money.

[Matthew Leifer]

Renatta,

Patents have absolutely nothing to do with this issue. The current legislation does not force scientists to publish results that they would not otherwise have wanted to publish. Instead, it forces them to make copies of any papers that they do publish available for free on the internet. Since we are talking about research that would have been published in any case, this has nothing to do with not publishing due to a patent claim.

[quiviran]

This sounds similar to Rick Santoums bill to jeep the National Weather Service from putting information on the internet for free that competed with Accuweathers for fee services (Accuweather was from his district). Hopefully this won't survive the sunlight either.

[PlaceboStudman]

I have written my senators and representatives and even the governor of Ohio, and have yet to hear any response.

This single piece of legislation could derail the health care reform, as the chronically or critically ill are forced to pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars to the coffers of subscription divisions of publications, to recieve potentially life saving information, research or a new medication. If they are not able to afford health care insurance, will anyone really be able to afford magazine subscriptions, or vice versa?

Yes, people, some of us will have to choose, and either way we lose

[breadandcircus34]

I'm fairly puzzled that John Conyers has a hand in this effort to restrict access to medical information. Do Americans not already pay enough for medical innovation?

As a physician, I fully support single payer health care. HR 676 is a reasonable starting framework for reform.

So, it is with sadness that I find Mr. Conyers to be on the wrong side of this issue.

[Wiseup2Day]

We are funding the research and that information should be kept public..an­d...the American people should own any patents or be able to sell them to get a return on our investment dollars.

[Renatta]

Publishing may not be the major interest in this congressional scientist muzzling scheme.

Far more money is at stake over medical patents which could be preempted by publication of research results. Academic development offices, pharm and medical companies, and IP attorneys would have quite a lot to gain form capturing more IP in the form of patents which they could then develop for profit.

How to proceed? The theory of patents can be helpful here: patents are a trade-off, a grant of money from the public to private inventors in the form of monopolistic prices on patented goods, in return for private investment in research which serves the public with new and useful inventions. In normal circumstances this bargain may be in the public interest, but not when the government has already paid to fund the invention, as through NIH research grants. In that case, to foster more patents by preventing publication means the public has to pay twice--once to fund invention, and again to obtain the inventions under patent prices.

So, forget the first amendment or academic freedom, those are merely principles. This is an economic issue that will hit taxpayers in the pocketbook. How serious an issue it is can be gleaned from President Obama's statement this week, that controlling health care costs (which are driven in large part by technology in the form of prices on patented medical inventions) is the keystone to rebuilding our nation's economic foundation.

[Grant Morrison]

..

Money, money, money, money. (I freely paraphrase the OJays.) MONEY.

When the money flows, the darkness grows. (Me paraphrasing me.)

.