On the Politico website today, there is a story up about how state-level Democrat activists are concerned over President Obama's new non-profit organization, "Dem officials fret over new Obama nonprofit". The President is turning his campaign operation into a 501(c)(4) non-profit "advocacy" operation.
The first person quoted by Politico is Minnesota's own Ken Martin, Chair of the state Democrat party and former head of the political charity WIN Minnesota (which I discuss at the end of Part 3 of my TakeAction series).
The overall thrust of the Politico piece is the worry over competition for dollars between state-level groups and Obama's national group.
But this quote from Mr. Martin caught my eye,
" 'I’m not a dummy,' he said. 'I understand post-Citizens United the necessity to set up vehicles for different types of money to flow' "
Ok. I don't understand. What different types of money? Money is money, what is he talking about?
Perhaps this sentence in the Politico piece offers a clue, "Nonprofit status allows Obama to raise unlimited money from both individuals and corporations, which the DNC and individual state parties cannot do."
Readers of my TakeAction series will know that I am no fan of networks that allow for the mingling of tax deductible charity dollars, tax exempt non-profit organizations, political action committees and political funds under the umbrella of a single organization. That the trend is going national is even worse news.
Whine, whine, whine. It was your SCOTUS that gave us this mess, and your Rove, Koch et al big shots who ran with it. So the Democrats are catching up? So what? When was the last time ANY Republican was actually for more transparency, except where it pertains to Democrats and their allies?
ReplyDelete