Posted: 10/04/11 23:05
by Dave Mindeman
Campaign Finance ruled on ballot initiative advocacy and interpreted that disclosure is mandatory.
Do we have any objections?
Even before today's meeting got underway, the National Organization for Marriage distributed a press release to say the board was "acting illegally in attempting to force NOM and other pro-family nonprofit organizations to disclose the names of donors."
Why yes we do.
The National Organization for (Some) Marriage wants to get rid of disclosure. Guess it is none of our business to know who is writing those big checks.
NOM is going to advocate for the Marriage Discrimination Amendment. They believe in their sense of tradtion. But apparently they believe more in "big money". And "big money" needs to be protected from public scrutiny. They certainly don't want any public reactions to their corporate donor friends.
Normally, corporations will pay big bucks for publicity. Million dollar commercials, multi-million dollar campaigns. They love it. But, oddly enough, when it comes to political donations or issue advocacy, they get a little skittish.
Now why would that be? Do they not have the courage of their convictions? Are they not willing to stand behind their "purchased free speech"?
NOM wants to advocate publicly, but they want their supporters to be secret.
Without disclosure we don't have the opportunity to hold advocates accountable. We don't get to evaluate why the monetary support is given. And we don't get to determine if their is a conflict of interest.
It is all done in the shadows. That is the kind of advocacy that will always be under suspicion.