I hate to generalize, but (I'm about to anyway) all my old representatives (dem or repub) voted Aye. You'd think that old people would enjoy some sort of anonymity. However, if is this being sold as a counter-terrorism method I could see why they'd vote for it.
I think the problem is that the "old" people just don't understand the bills. Call it Counter-terrorism, or anti-child-porn and you've got people signing because having a " nay" on a loosely languaged bill probably means fodder for attack ads down the road.
"Congressman [x] voted NO on stopping cyber terrorism"
My rep pulled support for SOPA at the last possible second, and only after public out cry. I sent him a letter thanking him for actually listening to his constituents, but kindly asked for him to resign. If these people don't understand the technology they're being asked to regulate, they should be replaced by those who do.
There is no possible way that a member of Congress could understand everything that they are passing laws on, so they rely on their staff members, constituents, and special interests to educate them.
In this case, unlike SOPA, there were quite a few people who do understand Internet technology who supported the bill.
