PACS, 501s, 527s, and You

Because most people don't know what the difference is between a contribution from a PAC, an individual, or a 527 group, the water is muddy enough for all candidates to cast aspersions on others. An example of this is between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, a summary below is from the AP

THE SPIN: In his ad, Obama states: "Since the gas lines of the '70's,
Democrats and Republicans have talked about energy independence, but nothing's
changed except now Exxon's making $40 billion a year, and we're paying $3.50 for
gas. ... I don't take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I
won't let them block change anymore. They'll pay a penalty on windfall profits.
We'll invest in alternative energy, create jobs and free ourselves from foreign
oil."

The Clinton campaign last week accused Obama of "false advertising."

"Senator Obama says he doesn't take campaign contributions from oil companies but the reality is that Exxon, Shell, and others are among his donors," Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said.

THE FACTS:

Obama does not take money from oil companies. No candidate does. It is illegal for corporations to give money to politicians. Corporations, however, do have political action committees that collect voluntary donations from employees and then donate them to candidates. Obama doesn't take money from PACs. He also doesn't take money from lobbyists.

But he does accept money from executives and other employees of oil companies and two of his fundraisers are oil company executives. As of Feb. 29, Obama's presidential campaign had received nearly $214,000 from oil and gas industry employees and their families, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Clinton had received nearly $307,000 from industry workers and their families

and Republican Sen. John McCain, the likely GOP presidential nominee, received nearly $394,000, according to the center's totals.

Two of Obama's fundraisers are Robert Cavnar, the chairman and chief executive of Houston-based Mission Resources Corp., and George Kaiser, the president and CEO of Tulsa-based Kaiser-Francis Oil Co.

In January and February alone, Obama received nearly $18,000 from ExxonMobil workers, according to Federal Election Commission records. Most of the donations were of $250 or less; the money came from workers ranging from executives to engineers to geologists to shift supervisors.

Overall, he has raised about $34,000 from Exxon Mobil workers since the beginning of his campaign. Exxon Mobil employees have given Clinton about $16,000 since the beginning of last year.

But this story neglects to say that Clinton has received $713,780 from all PACs so far for 2008 according to Open Secrets, although, to be fair, only $2300 come from Oil/Energy PACs.

And what about other groups?

There are the 501s and these aren't your United Way agencies or similar non-profits:510(c)(3)s. These are your 501(c)(4) groups are commonly called “social welfare” organizations that may engage in political activities, as long as these activities do not become their primary purpose. Similar restrictions apply to Section 501(c)(5) labor and agricultural groups, and to Section 501(c)(6) business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate boards and boards of trade.

Then there are the more well-known 527s which are tax-exempt groups organized under section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code to raise money for political activities including voter mobilization efforts, issue advocacy and the like. Currently, the FEC only requires a 527 group to file regular disclosure reports if it is a political party or political action committee (PAC) that engages in either activities expressly advocating the election or defeat of a federal candidate, or in electioneering communications. Otherwise, it must file either with the government of the state in which it is located or the Internal Revenue Service.

Many 527s run by special interest groups raise unlimited "soft money," which they use for voter mobilization and certain types of issue advocacy, but not for efforts that expressly advocate the election or defeat of a federal candidate or amount to electioneering communications.

Then there are the Non-Federal Groups – groups set up to raise unlimited contributions called “soft money,” which it spends on voter mobilization efforts and so-called issue ads that often criticize or tout a candidate’s record just before an election in a not-so-subtle effort to influence the election’s outcome. 501(c) groups and 527 groups may raise non-federal funds.

These groups are different from PACS in that they have no limits, as set by the McCain/Feingold bill. PACs are limited to giving up to $5,000 to a candidate per election and $15,000 to a National Party annually. PACs must also file with the Federal Election Commission within 10 days of formation.

As you can see, following the money trail is difficult and it is mostly about appearance or propriety. This is why a National Clean Election Law is needed. Call on all the national candidates to call for Clean Election laws.

At this point, over $791,766,183 spent on the campaigns (Roughly the cost of one day of war in Iraq, I might add), this campaign shapes up to be the most expensive ever and for what? What we have seen is more focus on motives than issues.