It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Forget Super PACs; Big Financing Comes from “Social Welfare” Nonprofits

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   
[url]http://www.allgov.com/Where_is_the_Money_Going/ViewNews/Forget_Super_PACs_Big_Campaign_Financing_is_Coming_from_Social_Welfae_Nonprofits_120620[/ url]


During the previous campaign, super PACs doled out $65 million. But more than 100 “social welfare” groups—nonprofits organized under section 501(c)(4) of the U.S. tax code—spent $95 million on political ads and other expenditures.

Unlike the super PACs, which are required to release the names of their contributors, the nonprofits can keep their supporters hidden. Not surprisingly then, nearly 90% of their spending ($84 million) from two years ago was never tied to a donor on disclosure forms.


I don't care what campaign finance vehicle they use but not having to reveal their supporters/contributors is IMO simply wrong.

I hope the IRS gets involved and somehow restricts them.

I wonder which party benefits the most?




posted on Jun, 20 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by oghamxx
I wonder which party benefits the most?


Wonder no more.
it says it right on the article you point to:


Conservatives were much more active in using “social welfare” groups in 2010, outspending liberal counterparts $78 million to $16 million with just three groups, the American Action Network, Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies and the American Future Fund, accounting for more than half the total. The first was founded by former Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman; the second was co-founded by George W. Bush advisor Karl Rove; and the third was created by GOP strategist Nick Ryan.

In the current election, super PACs have outspent nonprofits, $120 million to $9 million. “But with clearly defined candidates for both the White House and in most congressional races, nonprofits are expected to become more active,” wrote Michael Beckel of iWatch News.



posted on Jun, 20 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


those evil rich republicans have more money than those righteous, compassionate marxists. boo hoo
jealousy sucks



posted on Jun, 20 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by bjax9er
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


those evil rich republicans have more money than those righteous, compassionate marxists. boo hoo
jealousy sucks

Actually I just posted facts. I didn't say anything about evil, jealousy, or any of that. Typically a guilty person will take facts and become emotional..as you just did.

So, lets go there.

How does it feel to be a cheerleader for a party that has only a handful of super corporate powers buying your entire party against the multitudes of people on the other side.

One person with a million dollars, or 100k donating 10 dollars..equal.

good slave.



posted on Jun, 20 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


oh the super corporate powers. what happened to halliburton?
revenues up 39% under Obama



posted on Jun, 20 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by bjax9er
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


oh the super corporate powers. what happened to halliburton?
revenues up 39% under Obama


All corporations are doing wonderfully..and they are pushing for more.
like a fat tick wanting a bigger vein to suck off of.

Obama is a center right corporatist..Romney is a far right super corporatists.
the left anti-corporatists don't exist in the political landscape..so, our choice is to reward the corporations a little bit or a lot for destroying the global economy..

Which side do you fall on? little rewards or big rewards for the overlords..that is the only option here.



new topics

top topics
 
3

log in

join