The speed with which 501c4 nonprofits are being transformed
from lobbying groups that attempt to influence legislation into political
action committees that attempt to influence election outcomes is breath-taking
and potentially devastating for the public’s trust in the sector.
A front page article in yesterday’s NYTIMES documents that
American Crossroads—itself a 501c-4--is forming a new “superpac” to influence
the outcomes of Republican primary elections:
“The biggest donors in the Republican Party are financing a
new group to recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges
by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican Leaders
worry could complicate the party’s efforts to win control of the Senate.
The group, the Conservative Victory Project, is intended to
counter other organizations that have helped defeat establishment Republican
candidates over the last two election cycles.
It is the most robust attempt yet by Republicans to impose a new sense
of discipline on the part, particularly in primary races.” (The actual legal designation of CVP is not
specified in the article.)
(See the entire article at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/us/politics/top-gop-donors-seek-greater-say-in-senate-races.html?_r=0 )
Historically, 501c-4 nonprofits have served the public good
by providing citizens an easy and unlimited way to lobby their legislators. At the same time, the IRS has severely limited
the participation of these nonprofits in elections.
However, since the Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United Decision
asserted the rights of all corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money on
election activities, 501c4 organizations have been formed with the stated
purpose of influencing election outcomes.
This is quickly transforming the role that nonprofits play in our
society. No longer are nonprofits being used to merely
influence legislation, they are being used to directly influence who is being
elected and in office writing the legislation.
My concern is simple:
“Why should the public continue to support the tax advantages granted the
entire sector and critical to the financial health of 501c-3 charities when
many high-profile nonprofit groups are simply political campaign organizations?” Thoughts?
This concerns me for a couple of reasons. Through "picking the most conservative cantidate who can win" (Zeleny p 1) the Conservative Victory Project would remove some of the choice and competition that is a basic point of the American Political Process. Also, if CVP chose the cantidate they would have influence over the position taken on issues. CVP could provide financial support to their chosen cantidate through endorsement and advertisement. The creation of CRV does not really surprise me though. There have been times where I suspect the opposing party won an election partly due to the persona connections or actions of the republican cantidate.
ReplyDeleteANNEB,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your contribution to the dialogue.
I think your point is correct, the CVP is trying to pick conservative candidate who can win both the Republican primary AND the general election. Recently, Republican primaries have resulted in the nomination of some extremely conservative candidates that just were not acceptable to the general public--See Missouri 2012. And so the CVP is trying to "correct" this "problem". As a democrat, I don't see this as a problem since the result is a Democratic candidate winning the general election.
But to the larger issue, should 501c4s be formed expressly to influence the outcomes of elections? The nation has a whole set of campaign finance and election laws that govern how campaigns are to be financed and how elections are to be conducted. It seems to me that the new 501c4s are being formed simply to circumvent these laws. Also, IRS rules and regulations governing 501c4s explicitly state that they cannot have as their primary goal the influencing of elections. Why do you think the IRS is allowing these 501c4s to operate as they are?
Jeff