Rob Zerban:

Paul Ryan's decision, as a partisan leader and head of the Budget Committee, to back away from legislation actively pursued by another Republican Committee Chair, is a major accomplishment.

It's interesting that advocates of free speech and good Internet governance have adopted the strategy of flooding the opposition with campaign donations as a way of influencing an elected official's position on a pending bill.

Do you have important initiatives in Washington that could be undermined if they become the target of popular protests?

Reading between the lines of his statement, Ryan has not returned the "large contributions from pro-SOPA interests", and although he does not "support H.R. 3261 in its current form" [emphasis mine], this qualified language suggests that an amended version of the bill could gain his full support. Note that the press release is entitled "Congressman Paul Ryan Voices Concerns with H.R. 3261" [emphasis mine].

Is there a viable alternative course of action for those like Ryan who seek to address the "legitimate problem" of foreign-sourced counterfeit goods? Is there a framework for evaluating the acceptability of potential courses of action? Is there an approach that achieves the legitimate objectives of commercial stakeholders without infringing individual rights and sacrificing the public interest? Or is Ryan still in the wrong because he believes there is a legitimate problem when in fact there is not?

Temporarily avoiding imminent disaster is a kind of 'accomplishment', but it's akin to deferring a decision on the payroll tax 'holiday' for another two months. There's an endless supply of bad ideas waiting to be killed at great expense. Actually producing an elegant solution to a legitimate problem would be an Accomplishment of a higher order.

RE: Congressman drops support for SOPA - Boing Boing