Mickey Mouse Goes to Washington . . . Again

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT

If you saw any of ABC's doc-faux-drama The Path to 9/11 last night, you should be more than convinced that the whole thing was indeed a Rovian propaganda piece to blame Clinton and benefit Bush. While some might find it hard to believe that the Disney-owned company is playing politics, it certainly would not be the first time.

In a search through the annals of time, we came across a 1998 article from the right-wing EagleForum.org entitled "Why Disney Has Clout with the Republican Congress." It seems that, faced with pending expiration of its biggest copyrights - Mickey Mouse, Pluto, and Goofy - and congressional inaction on a bill to extend copyrights for an additional 20 years to a whopping 95 year total, Disney decided to let its money do the talking.

The Disney Political Action Committee (PAC) lined up Republican and Democratic co-sponsors on the two Judiciary Committees and rewarded them with direct campaign contributions. . . Of the 12 sponsors of the Senate bill, nine received contributions from Disney's PAC. . . Of the 13 sponsors of the House bill, ten received contributions from Disney's PAC. . .

Eisner took his lobbying directly to Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS). One week after they met, the Disney PAC gave $1000 to Lott on the same day that he signed on as a co-sponsor. . .

Just as interesting as the money trail is the way the Republican and Democratic members of the two Judiciary Committees worked together to facilitate passage of this bill without hearings, debate, or notice to the public. . .

On a single day, October 7, the Senate Judiciary Committee discharged the bill by unanimous consent, the full Senate passed the bill by unanimous consent (without a roll call), and the House passed the bill by voice vote under suspension of the rules.

One does not have to be a frequent watcher of C-SPAN to know that to successful voice votes on the same day without any debate over a bill with ramifications over hundreds of billions - if not trillions - of dollars is no coincidence.

Could it be that the bill just happened to be good legislation? Nope. Consider this New York Times editorial excerpt:

The purpose of the 1998 Congressional extension was not protecting artists, but enriching media companies that hold property rights in their creations, virtually in perpetuity. The founders did not envision copyright being put to this use, and the Supreme Court should not allow it.

Disney's successful 1998 lobbying campaign created the 11th copyright extension in 40 years - almost four per decade - and it is a safe bet they will be shooting for more.

Clearly, Disney is not afraid to get involved in Washington. They have used millions to pull the strings of politicians from both parties for years. The $40+ million they spent producing The Path to 9/11 could well have been written off as lobbying straight to the White House. This would be a drop in the bucket for the multi-billion dollar company and could yield far more in the years to come.

And don't forget reports about the new fingerprint scanners at Disney World: "Disney's old biometric scanners "read" information about finger size and shape. But the new ones record fingerprints, making it possible for Disney to synch its data to a wide variety of databases, including the FBI's." With warrantless wiretapping and phone monitoring - and that's just what we actually know about - people might not even care if the NSA had access to Disney World records.

Could Mickey Mouse be replacing outgoing Prime Minister Tony Blair as President Dopey's main ally in his "war on terror?"

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT