Receiving an EFF Pioneer Award in 2007, his introduction alone describes why he is a perfect candidate. The audio for the speech is, thankfully, available in the Internet archive. The introduction given by one of the EFF technologists is a wonderful description of how important Bruce Schneier's contributions to technology and security really are, outside of his incredible cryptographic skills.
"Skilled in his exposition of ideas about security."
Bruce's ability to explain, in clear terms, what is or isn't wrong about particular systems is amazing. Whenever there's some sort of technological thing going on in the world, security related, Bruce's blog is often one of the first place I go to.
"Made people aware of the context in which security happens. The context in which security measures exist … the political context, the economic context, the psychological context, the social context in which security really happens or often doesn't happen."
This is an incredibly valuable and necessary outlook on security in this day and age. The world needs more people who are aware of security, not as just some thing that you do, but really as a mindset and thing that you really have to wrap your head around.
"Worked really hard to demystify security. To help people think clearly about what really works and doesn't work."
"Emphasis and insistence that security is not an objective thing but is relative to the observer. That it's always from someone's perspective."
"You don't just have security as this thing that's out there, but security has a kind of political dimension, that you need to have a prior notion of what kinds of actions are appropriate and what kinds of actions are warranted."
I couldn't think of a more appropriate and equipped individual to help the EFF at this time in our history.
 - http://archive.org/details/Bruce_Schneier_EFF_Pioneer_Awards...
 - http://www.schneier.com
Great news - I've read a couple of really interesting articles that Schneier's put out in recent weeks - but is the scandal actually intensifying? I'm afraid somebody is going to need to fill me in on the current state of the reaction from the public/media at large; I tend to lock myself in a filter bubble of news relevant to my interests.
So basically, your point about the focus being drawn away from the NSA itself seems correct to me.
Here's a better source:
Maybe you should use DuckDuckGo .
In addition to Schneier, EFF's Board of Directors includes John Perry Barlow, Brian Behlendorf, John Buckman, Lorrie Cranor, David Farber, John Gilmore, Brewster Kahle, Pam Samuelson, Brad Templeton, and Jonathan Zittrain.
Barlow and Gilmore are the EFF founders, along with Mitch Kapor who hasn't been that active for quite a while.
The subtext of the argument was the degree to which the national security apparatus should take the lead on U.S. cybersecurity, vs. domestic agencies like DHS or law enforcement like the FBI. Schneier argued that the "threat" of cyberwar was being pumped up by the defense agencies and industries to help justify greater power and contracts.
I have a sneaking suspicion this is the beginning of a gradual recognition of orgnaisations like EFF in having a voice in regular politics. Not a big one perhaps, but being at the table.
Having said that, you're right in that there are not very many such jobs.
If anything they'd use the PAC to get money from large donors (in the millions of dollars).
By phase 2 I just meant it would be really beneficial to get a formal (EFF sponsored or not) political action committee focused primarily on internet users' rights.
I try to read everything that Bruce Schneier writes on security, politics, and policy.
Also whenever he comes up you have to visit: