6 ms·

Elon Musk quits Zuckerberg's immigration advocacy group

53 points by RougeFemme 13y ago

blinkingled 13y ago
Interesting to note that Musk himself is an immigrant (born in SA). The Reuters article speculates that he quit over an unrelated matter - the FWD.us group sponsored ads for senators who supported drilling oil pipelines in Alaska which apparently did not sit well with Musk.
- rst 13y ago
  The pipeline that FWD.us has been touting would actually be in the "lower 48" --- it's the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which would be intended to transport a particularly dirty form of petrochemicals ("diluted bitumen", which is something like sand soaked in crude oil) across sensitive land (some proposed routes have it going over the Oglalla aquifer, which is a major reservoir for American agriculture).
  - twoodfin 13y ago
    Wait, is the objection about the safety of the pipeline (Why is it less safe than any of a dozen other pipelines?) or the facilitation of carbon emissions from burning the contents of the pipeline? Forgive me for being blunt, but most pipeline opponents seem to emphasize the former when what they really object to is the latter.
    - blinkingled 13y ago
      Given how much damage the pipeline leaks can and have caused to the environment, I think the objections ought to be for both.
      - twoodfin 13y ago
        So are you just as interested in shutting down (all?) existing pipelines? If not, what's the distinction?
        eightyone 13y ago
        They never suggested that. A simple cost-benefit analysis shows us that this pipeline simply isn't worth it.
        twoodfin 13y ago
        So simple it can't be linked to?
        blinkingled 13y ago
        Not really, just saying that if there are so many leaks causing damages - questioning it is the least that can be done. May be the current capacity is enough and they could do more towards guaranteeing / eliminating leaks before building new ones. I don't know - just think that blindly accepting the leaks seems wrong.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - jacoblyles 13y ago
      It sounds like FUD. I haven't seen convincing evidence that this pipeline will be any more dangerous than other pipelines.
    - prostoalex 13y ago
      The first time the pipeline was vetoed, the objections were over safety and environmental damage: http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=463557&CategoryId=13280 http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=463557&Categor... "Opponents of the Keystone XL have stressed the environmental damage they say the pipeline would cause in the Sand Hills area, especially due to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions and the destabilization of sensitive ecosystems."
    - twistedpair 13y ago
      Well, if we didn't burn hydrocarbons... we'd need to buy Elon's electric cars! How convenient!
  - blinkingled 13y ago
    I don't know how the pipelines fit FWD.us's agenda. Is it possible they were just supporting senators that supported immigration reform but also happened to support the pipeline? If so, it is kinda hard to blame the group.
    - sbov 13y ago
      It's right there in the article. They funded ads for senators that support immigration reform, but the ads also touted the candidate's general positions, which included supporting the pipeline. Paying for an ad that touted support of the pipeline was likely the problem, not that they supported the pipeline at all.
    - MisterBastahrd 13y ago
      It's called consensus building. In the US, bills are often riddled with bits and pieces of pork barrel legislation that have nothing to do with the intent of the bill. In this case, FWD.us is trying to butter up these senators and representatives by advertising for something they want in hopes that the congressmen will return the favor when it comes time to vote for immigration "reform."
      - snowwrestler 13y ago
        This is actually an example of providing political cover. Immigration reform is not popular with conservatives, therefore politicians with conservative electorates (like Rubio, Graham, and Begich) might lose their next election if they vote for it. This makes them less likely to vote for it. Running ads in conservative areas to promote immigration reform will not help; the dislike is too deeply held. FWD.us does not have nearly enough money or time to change such ingrained cultural beliefs. So instead they run ads supporting the politicians on issues that conservatives already like--like energy development--to try to strengthen the conservative credentials of these politicians. That way the politicians will hopefully feel more secure in their seats, and therefore more comfortable with taking a risk by voting for immigration reform. The hard part of this strategy is that you might have to run ads supporting things you personally disagree with, simply because it's a good political tactic. Musk probably decided that he cares about getting off oil more than he cares about passing immigration reform, so the balance was backward for him.
twoodfin 13y ago
Can someone explain to me why expansion of visa programs for skilled workers is so controversial? Hell, Mitt Romney wanted to "staple a green card" to every STEM diploma. Why the need for these three dimensional Vulcan chess tactics if that's the goal? My guess is because labor unions and the Democrats (generally) don't want to expand visas for skilled workers without "comprehensive" legalization. But I am definitely biased so I would not at all mind an alternative explanation.
- metaphorm 13y ago
  I'm not an expert on this issue either but I think you're understanding it correctly. There are interest groups on both the left (protectionist labor unions) and the right (nativists) who are hostile to immigrant workers, in both high-skilled and blue collar positions. The "3 dimensional vulcan chess" approach here is an attempt to get congress to actually vote on the law even though it pisses off some entrenched groups. Its really really hard to get congress to do anything at all, let alone do something that pisses off some of the activists in the party bases.
  - spamizbad 13y ago
    Leaving FWD.us has nothing to do with immigration. Zuck's political advocacy group FWD.us also funnels money to http://www.americansforaconservativedirection.com/ http://www.americansforaconservativedirection.com/ -- Which also advocates for the Keystone XL pipeline and more drilling etc. (And also the mostly DOA 'Gang-of-8' Republican plan for Immigration reform) US politics is pretty cynical, but not quite cynical enough to blatantly play both sides like this.
    - metaphorm 13y ago
      I'm speculating here, but I think you're wrong and that this is exactly playing both sides. To me it looks like a quid pro quo arrangement where FWD.us helps a conservative cause (the pipeline) in exchange for cooperation for a immigration reform. Keep an eye on it. I'd expect to see some political grease applied to a liberal cause in the near future too. I think their game plan is to basically buy favors with senators until they've got enough votes to pass a law they actually care about.
lost-theory 13y ago
The ads: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3Iih8K0U27k http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YHuJkHge-sw http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Y...
dmschulman 13y ago
From my understanding, part of the controversy stems from FWD.us stating in general terms that they are lobbying for "immigration reform", but in actuality, they are lobbying for a very specific type of immigration reform, one that would only benefit tech companies looking for highly skilled and foreign (cheaper) labor. FWD.us isn't advocating to solve the larger immigration issues the US already faces (a clear and present issue that needs resolution), but is merely taking advantage of a political situation to further their own interests.
- dmschulman 13y ago
  I also applaud Elon for sticking to his guns and taking his philanthropy elsewhere. Tech people and VCs especially know that big problems are worth solving more than small boutique problems.
  - dfc 13y ago
    Tech people and VCs especially know that big problems are worth solving more than small boutique problems. I almost threw up when I read this. Are you serious? What is it about tech people that makes us so wonderful? And why do you think the rest of the population is so simple minded? Furthermore I thought the group Musk is leaving contains other tech people (at least as traditionally defined). Are you saying that since they do not see the big picture as Musk sees it that they are simple minded people not worthy of being called "tech people"? Do you think any of the people on the supporters page[1] are "true tech people that know big problems are worth solving"? [1] http://www.fwd.us/our_supporters http://www.fwd.us/our_supporters
    - rhizome 13y ago
      I think he means, "new money."
      - dfc 13y ago
        Only on the west coast would Bill Gates count as "old money" :)
zafka 13y ago
I like Elon Musk more every day. Someone who makes cool products that look to improve the quality of life for everyone, while still making some decent money from it. It would have been sad if he had not bailed when the group started pushing an agenda that was counter to his ideals.
bconway 13y ago
The group supported a number of senators' stances on immigration reform, some of whom also happened to support expanding pipelines for gas production. Elon Musk, CEO of an electric car company, decides to leave the group. Not much dot-connecting required here.
fiatmoney 13y ago
Fun fact: all H1B salary data is public. It's parsed and made searchable here and several other places: http://www.h1bwage.com/ http://www.h1bwage.com/ And if you dig a bit you can get the raw data: http://www.flcdatacenter.com/ http://www.flcdatacenter.com/

53 points by RougeFemme 13y ago

Interesting to note that Musk himself is an immigrant (born in SA). The Reuters article speculates that he quit over an unrelated matter - the FWD.us group sponsored ads for senators who supported drilling oil pipelines in Alaska which apparently did not sit well with Musk.

rst 13y ago
The pipeline that FWD.us has been touting would actually be in the "lower 48" --- it's the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which would be intended to transport a particularly dirty form of petrochemicals ("diluted bitumen", which is something like sand soaked in crude oil) across sensitive land (some proposed routes have it going over the Oglalla aquifer, which is a major reservoir for American agriculture).
- twoodfin 13y ago
  Wait, is the objection about the safety of the pipeline (Why is it less safe than any of a dozen other pipelines?) or the facilitation of carbon emissions from burning the contents of the pipeline? Forgive me for being blunt, but most pipeline opponents seem to emphasize the former when what they really object to is the latter.
  - blinkingled 13y ago
    Given how much damage the pipeline leaks can and have caused to the environment, I think the objections ought to be for both.
    - twoodfin 13y ago
      So are you just as interested in shutting down (all?) existing pipelines? If not, what's the distinction?
      - eightyone 13y ago
        They never suggested that. A simple cost-benefit analysis shows us that this pipeline simply isn't worth it.
        twoodfin 13y ago
        So simple it can't be linked to?
      - blinkingled 13y ago
        Not really, just saying that if there are so many leaks causing damages - questioning it is the least that can be done. May be the current capacity is enough and they could do more towards guaranteeing / eliminating leaks before building new ones. I don't know - just think that blindly accepting the leaks seems wrong.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - jacoblyles 13y ago
    It sounds like FUD. I haven't seen convincing evidence that this pipeline will be any more dangerous than other pipelines.
  - prostoalex 13y ago
    The first time the pipeline was vetoed, the objections were over safety and environmental damage: http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=463557&CategoryId=13280 http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=463557&Categor... "Opponents of the Keystone XL have stressed the environmental damage they say the pipeline would cause in the Sand Hills area, especially due to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions and the destabilization of sensitive ecosystems."
  - twistedpair 13y ago
    Well, if we didn't burn hydrocarbons... we'd need to buy Elon's electric cars! How convenient!
- blinkingled 13y ago
  I don't know how the pipelines fit FWD.us's agenda. Is it possible they were just supporting senators that supported immigration reform but also happened to support the pipeline? If so, it is kinda hard to blame the group.
  - sbov 13y ago
    It's right there in the article. They funded ads for senators that support immigration reform, but the ads also touted the candidate's general positions, which included supporting the pipeline. Paying for an ad that touted support of the pipeline was likely the problem, not that they supported the pipeline at all.
  - MisterBastahrd 13y ago
    It's called consensus building. In the US, bills are often riddled with bits and pieces of pork barrel legislation that have nothing to do with the intent of the bill. In this case, FWD.us is trying to butter up these senators and representatives by advertising for something they want in hopes that the congressmen will return the favor when it comes time to vote for immigration "reform."
    - snowwrestler 13y ago
      This is actually an example of providing political cover. Immigration reform is not popular with conservatives, therefore politicians with conservative electorates (like Rubio, Graham, and Begich) might lose their next election if they vote for it. This makes them less likely to vote for it. Running ads in conservative areas to promote immigration reform will not help; the dislike is too deeply held. FWD.us does not have nearly enough money or time to change such ingrained cultural beliefs. So instead they run ads supporting the politicians on issues that conservatives already like--like energy development--to try to strengthen the conservative credentials of these politicians. That way the politicians will hopefully feel more secure in their seats, and therefore more comfortable with taking a risk by voting for immigration reform. The hard part of this strategy is that you might have to run ads supporting things you personally disagree with, simply because it's a good political tactic. Musk probably decided that he cares about getting off oil more than he cares about passing immigration reform, so the balance was backward for him.

twoodfin 13y ago

Can someone explain to me why expansion of visa programs for skilled workers is so controversial? Hell, Mitt Romney wanted to "staple a green card" to every STEM diploma. Why the need for these three dimensional Vulcan chess tactics if that's the goal? My guess is because labor unions and the Democrats (generally) don't want to expand visas for skilled workers without "comprehensive" legalization. But I am definitely biased so I would not at all mind an alternative explanation.

metaphorm 13y ago
I'm not an expert on this issue either but I think you're understanding it correctly. There are interest groups on both the left (protectionist labor unions) and the right (nativists) who are hostile to immigrant workers, in both high-skilled and blue collar positions. The "3 dimensional vulcan chess" approach here is an attempt to get congress to actually vote on the law even though it pisses off some entrenched groups. Its really really hard to get congress to do anything at all, let alone do something that pisses off some of the activists in the party bases.
- spamizbad 13y ago
  Leaving FWD.us has nothing to do with immigration. Zuck's political advocacy group FWD.us also funnels money to http://www.americansforaconservativedirection.com/ http://www.americansforaconservativedirection.com/ -- Which also advocates for the Keystone XL pipeline and more drilling etc. (And also the mostly DOA 'Gang-of-8' Republican plan for Immigration reform) US politics is pretty cynical, but not quite cynical enough to blatantly play both sides like this.
  - metaphorm 13y ago
    I'm speculating here, but I think you're wrong and that this is exactly playing both sides. To me it looks like a quid pro quo arrangement where FWD.us helps a conservative cause (the pipeline) in exchange for cooperation for a immigration reform. Keep an eye on it. I'd expect to see some political grease applied to a liberal cause in the near future too. I think their game plan is to basically buy favors with senators until they've got enough votes to pass a law they actually care about.

lost-theory 13y ago

The ads: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3Iih8K0U27k http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YHuJkHge-sw http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Y...

dmschulman 13y ago

From my understanding, part of the controversy stems from FWD.us stating in general terms that they are lobbying for "immigration reform", but in actuality, they are lobbying for a very specific type of immigration reform, one that would only benefit tech companies looking for highly skilled and foreign (cheaper) labor. FWD.us isn't advocating to solve the larger immigration issues the US already faces (a clear and present issue that needs resolution), but is merely taking advantage of a political situation to further their own interests.

dmschulman 13y ago
I also applaud Elon for sticking to his guns and taking his philanthropy elsewhere. Tech people and VCs especially know that big problems are worth solving more than small boutique problems.
- dfc 13y ago
  Tech people and VCs especially know that big problems are worth solving more than small boutique problems. I almost threw up when I read this. Are you serious? What is it about tech people that makes us so wonderful? And why do you think the rest of the population is so simple minded? Furthermore I thought the group Musk is leaving contains other tech people (at least as traditionally defined). Are you saying that since they do not see the big picture as Musk sees it that they are simple minded people not worthy of being called "tech people"? Do you think any of the people on the supporters page[1] are "true tech people that know big problems are worth solving"? [1] http://www.fwd.us/our_supporters http://www.fwd.us/our_supporters
  - rhizome 13y ago
    I think he means, "new money."
    - dfc 13y ago
      Only on the west coast would Bill Gates count as "old money" :)

zafka 13y ago

I like Elon Musk more every day. Someone who makes cool products that look to improve the quality of life for everyone, while still making some decent money from it. It would have been sad if he had not bailed when the group started pushing an agenda that was counter to his ideals.

bconway 13y ago

The group supported a number of senators' stances on immigration reform, some of whom also happened to support expanding pipelines for gas production. Elon Musk, CEO of an electric car company, decides to leave the group. Not much dot-connecting required here.

fiatmoney 13y ago

Fun fact: all H1B salary data is public. It's parsed and made searchable here and several other places: http://www.h1bwage.com/ http://www.h1bwage.com/ And if you dig a bit you can get the raw data: http://www.flcdatacenter.com/ http://www.flcdatacenter.com/