Many of you have no doubt read Jeanne Allen’s excellent piece in Politico  revealing the creation of two independent Democratic groups that will be active in the 2012 election cycle. Both of course will accept unlimited donations, and similar to the pairing of American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS, one of the Democratic groups will disclose all donors, while the other is a 501(c)4 that does not..

 

I don’t find anything particularly hypocritical about the decision to create these groups – whether one likes it or not, they are part of the political process now, and I can’t fault even the most diehard Democratic ‘reformer’ for deciding not to unilaterally disarm. If Republicans are raising and spending big bucks to promote their favored candidates, it would be foolish of Democrats not to do likewise.

 

But I am curious about the decision of Priorities USA to not to disclose donors to the 501(c)4 group. I’ve heard repeatedly from the ‘reform’ community that only nefarious interests would have a need to not disclose donors, and that there is no chilling of speech that occurs through disclosure. If that’s true – and while I have my doubts, ‘reformers’ do not seem to share them – then why would a group run by ‘reformers’ decide not to disclose their donors?

 

I’ve written more here, in case anyone is interested: http://www.campaignfreedom.org/blog/detail/why-are-reformers-making-donor-secrecy-a-priority

 

Sean Parnell

President

Center for Competitive Politics

http://www.campaignfreedom.org

http://www.twitter.com/seanparnellccp

124 S. West Street, #201

Alexandria, VA  22310

(703) 894-6800 phone

(703) 894-6813 direct

(703) 894-6811 fax

 

_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law