December 15, 2011 8:03 PM

SOPA tweet triggers political explosion, delays vote

By
Declan McCullagh

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, in CBS' "Face the Nation," Dec. 11, 2011. (CBS)

(CNET) 

A marathon debate today in the House of Representatives on the Stop Online Piracy Act wasn't derailed by procedural questions, even though not one hearing had been held on how the law would actually work.

It wasn't derailed by questions about SOPA's substance, even though legal scholars and technologists have said it could suppress free speech by virtually deleting Web sites accused of copyright infringement.

Instead, today's markup of SOPA in the House Judiciary committee was derailed by a snarky post on Twitter. (See CNET's FAQ on SOPA.)

The tweet in question came from Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), a pro-gun, anti-abortion conservative who wrote that: "We are debating the Stop Online Piracy Act and Shiela Jackson [sic] has so bored me that I'm killing time by surfing the Internet."

That would be Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Texas Democrat who's a notoriously combative member of Congress and was named the "meanest" by the Washingtonian magazine. She didn't take kindly to being called boring.

Jackson Lee objected. And the hearing ground to a sudden halt.

The "offensive" tweet

The "offensive" tweet

It was her use of the O-word--"offensive"--that interrupted the steady flow of amendments that critics were offering to SOPA, which were being merrily defeated one after another by the pro-SOPA majority on the committee.

It's inappropriate "to have a member of the Judiciary committee be so offensive," Jackson Lee said.

Unfortunately for audience members who might have appreciated the relative merits of a colloquy between Jackson Lee and her Twitter-ing interlocutor, King wasn't actually in the room by the time she discovered the alarming tweet.

Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.), the committee's previous chairman and an old parliamentary hand, leaped to his Republican colleague's defense, suggesting that the clerk delete the word "offensive" from the official record. Jackson Lee refused.

Rep. Lamar Smith, a SOPA-loving Texas Republican who's the chairman of the committee, renewed that request. He had apparently concluded that unlike "boring," her use of the word "offensive" violated House rules. (See CNET's profile of Smith.)

He asked Jackson Lee to formally withdraw her remark. She refused.

File photo of U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX)

(Credit: Getty Images)

Smith tried again, saying that he was trying to "avoid making an official ruling" to the effect that Jackson Lee "impugned the integrity of a member of this committee." Would she "consider having just that one word stricken from the record?"

Jackson Lee again refused. She wanted King to "give the committee an apology."

But he wasn't there. And the important question of integrity-impugning had to be resolved. The committee members waited for the stenographer to read Jackson Lee's precise remarks back from the official transcript.

House rules, as you might imagine, provide procedures for how to deal with "disorderly words" and "unparliamentary language."

One option: "In many instances, the Chair will observe that debate is becoming personal and approaching a violation of the rules, in which case he may simply request that Members proceed in order."

But when a politico is in another building, or perhaps even in another city, and commenting through Twitter, that venerable option to promote civility (dating back to 1837) doesn't exactly work.

Jackson Lee consulted with the committee's parliamentarian. Everyone else waited.

Finally, the resolution: Jackson Lee relented. She wanted to have "just that one word stricken from the record."

Instead of King's tweet being "offensive," Jackson Lee concluded, she would merely deem it "impolitic and unkind."

King, by the way, has remained impenitent, and perhaps even amused. His last tweet says: "Judging from the many responses of my critics, they've never heard of multitasking and need to, in the words of Cain, get a sense of humor."

The committee resumed debate and a series of votes, typically by a margin of around 12 to 22, siding with the Motion Picture Association of America, the Recording Industry Association of America, and their allies. By the end of the day, SOPA remained entirely intact.

© 2011 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.
Add a Comment See all 29 Comments
by vect0r85 January 3, 2012 1:12 AM EST
Does anyone know a central place to talk about SOPA? Everything is so disconnected. All I found was http://talksopa.com, but not much more. Wish there was one place to go than tons of random threads.
Reply to this comment
by Info44111 December 27, 2011 7:19 AM EST
Any Politician who votes yes on this bill WILL NOT BE VOTED BACK IN OFFICE . DO NOT BE THICK ON THIS ONE .
Reply to this comment
by mask2697 December 18, 2011 1:11 PM EST
SOPA will not make it past supreme court if it even makes it that far. SOPA is a bill that has been designed by people who don't even know how the internet functions. There is no reason to regulate the internet short of gang/terrorist group functions and other serious illegal activity (the stuff that people wont argue about it being wrong). This bill doesn't only effect the United states, but the world. It would be irresponcible to continue and it goes against the constitution by impeding free speech. Not to mention the fact that this bill is lobbied by companies who use bias and impossible to prove facts (the $1,000,000 that is mentioned is in no way provable as most of that money would be given to people illegally pirating it and selling it off the internet or by people simply not buying the game. Because lets face it, most pirated things are due to people hating the company, for example, Battlefield3 is pirated because people hate origin)
Reply to this comment
by notfucharley January 13, 2012 3:33 PM EST
The bill was designed by the media industry, not by the politicians. The media industry knows exactly how the internet functions, and they couldn't care less. All they care about is extending and strengthening copy protection so they can make a few more bucks.
by MegaProcrastination December 16, 2011 7:21 PM EST
Oh, this is rich! This is what part of the SOPA hearing CBS decides to cover on its front page?

It should be being shouted from the rooftops that constituents' wishes are being ignored and that testimony from experts opposed to this law aren't even being allowed to testify.

I'm wondering how many of these Congress people understand that by voting yes for SOPA they'll be pretty much voting themselves out of office next election.
Reply to this comment
by Brokennews December 16, 2011 12:59 PM EST
I sit and wonder just how far, how much of a Police State, the Republican Party is willing to create to keep control.

by skyk801 December 16, 2011 12:06 PM EST




WH OKs military detention of terrorism suspects

"If President Obama signs this bill, it will damage both his legacy and American's reputation for upholding the rule of law," said Laura Murphy, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "The last time Congress passed indefinite detention legislation was during the McCarthy era, and President Truman had the courage to veto that bill."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57343287/wh-oks-military-detention-of-terrorism-suspects/?tag=mncol;lst;9


It's not just Republicans is it?
Who about a little something thrown the Dems way too?
Reply to this comment
by Brokennews December 16, 2011 12:51 PM EST
"Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Texas Democrat who's a notoriously combative member of Congress and was named the "meanest" by the Washingtonian magazine."



She must be a real sweetheart to qualify for this title?
Reply to this comment
by skyk801 December 16, 2011 12:06 PM EST
I sit and wonder just how far, how much of a Police State, the Republican Party is willing to create to keep control. I also wonder how much more in bed with Corporations any Party can get. It's hard to determine which is which anymore. It might help if the Corporations just sent their lobbyist to these debates... after all they WERE there at one time weren't they?
Reply to this comment
by MegaProcrastination December 16, 2011 7:08 PM EST
vsmit, she also happens to be almost the ONLY member of Congress trying to oppose this ridiculous law!
by ken1dall December 16, 2011 11:29 AM EST
What does King being a "pro gun, anti abortion conservative" have to do with this story? They didn't say she was "overweight and homely".
Reply to this comment
by skyk801 December 16, 2011 12:12 PM EST
The POINT is that those like King do NOT and ARE NOT willing to even LISTEN to the other side! ANYONE who has tried to talk to one of the Anti Abortion Crowd KNOWS exactly what is being said and MAN is it a FACT! Have you considered maybe some night courses in READING. It seems you Talking Point REPEATERS get to one of your buzz Words.. something you have been programed to go off on and NONE OF THE OTHER WORDS seem to matter.
by legacyABQ2 December 16, 2011 10:47 AM EST
Gee what a surprise. The falsely named "conservative" republicans are all for this bill, a piece of trash evil bill that codifies censorship not just by the government, but by private corporations, without evidence or trial, in the name of copyright infringement. Sickening hypocrisy from the right.

Freedom lovers? My AZZ
Reply to this comment
by Zann-Zel December 16, 2011 10:06 AM EST
Does no one think that Steve King needed to get his ass OFF the internet and back to work? If he's bored by his job - QUIT!
Reply to this comment
by Zann-Zel December 16, 2011 10:45 AM EST
That doesn't give him the right to quit doing his job and play around on the internet!
by RickCain4150 December 16, 2011 12:07 PM EST
He was probably watching pirate movies on his blackberry anyway.
See all 29 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook